Managing The Aging Worforce

MANAGING THE AGING WORKFORCE 1
Managing the Aging Workforce
Guido Hertel1 and Hannes Zacher2

1
University of Münster
2
University of Groningen
Chapter to appear in Viswesvaran, C., Anderson, N., Ones, D. S., & Sinangil, H. K. The SAGE
Handbook of Industrial, Work, & Organizational Psychology, 2nd Edition, Volume 3.
Author Contact
Guido Hertel (corresponding author), University of Münster , Department of Psychology,
Fliednerstrasse 21, 48149 Münster, Germany, Phone: +49 251 8334161, e-mail: ghertel@uni-
muenster.de
Hannes Zacher, University of Groningen, Department of Psychology, Grote Kruisstraat
2/1, 9712 TS Groningen, The Netherlands, Phone: +31 50363 6187, e-mail: h.zacher@rug.nl
Abstract
The aging of the workforces in most developed and many developing countries has significant
implications for employees, human resource management, organizations, and societies.
However, the prevailing perception of these demographic changes is often negative based on
broader stereotypes and misconceptions of age at work. The goal of this chapter is to provide an
integrative account of extant knowledge on work and aging that corrects existing
misconceptions, emphasizes (partly neglected) potentials particularly of older workers, and helps
maximizing the opportunities of an aging workforce. We first review key demographic trends in
the 21st century as well as their reasons and implications. Second, we present an overview of
common age stereotypes and their potential effects on discrimination in organizations. Third, we
outline important theoretical frameworks and methodological considerations in the field of work
and aging. Fourth, we review empirical findings on relationships between age and cognitive
abilities, occupational health and workability, work motivation, self-regulation and socio-
emotional skills, work performance, and occupational well-being. We conclude the chapter by
outlining implications for an age-inclusive human resource management and future research
needs in the growing field of work and aging.
Keywords: Aging workforce; demographic change; lifespan development; age stereotypes; age-
inclusive management
Introduction
The unprecedented and rapid aging of populations and workforces in most developed and
many developing countries has significant implications for employees, human resource
management, organizations, and societies as a whole (Carstensen, 2009; Chand & Tung, 2014;
Ilmarinen, 2009; Vaupel & Loichinger, 2006). Over the past 15 years, relationships between age
and work outcomes have been discussed in several authoritative books (P. M. Bal, Kooij, &
Rousseau, 2015; Czaja & Sharit, 2009; Field, Burke, & Cooper, 2013; Finkelstein, Truxillo,
Fraccaroli, & Kanfer, 2015; Hedge & Borman, 2012; Shultz & Adams, 2007a), review articles
(Bowen, Noack, & Staudinger, 2011; Farr & Ringseis, 2002; Hertel, Thielgen, et al., 2013;
Schalk et al., 2010; Truxillo, Cadiz, & Hammer, 2015; Warr, 2001), special issues of
organizational psychology journals (e.g., B. B. Baltes & Finkelstein, 2011; Deller & Hertel,
2009; Hertel, Van der Heijden, de Lange, & Deller, 2013; Truxillo & Fraccaroli, 2013), and
meta-analyses (e.g., Kooij, De Lange, Jansen, Kanfer, & Dikkers, 2011; Ng & Feldman, 2008,
2010; Rauschenbach, Krumm, Thielgen, & Hertel, 2013). Moreover, since 2015, the new journal
Work, Aging and Retirement provides a central forum for evidence-based and translational
research on worker aging and retirement (Wang, 2015). While research on work and aging is
clearly gaining momentum, workforce aging is still often viewed negatively by practitioners,
focusing on difficulties and conflicts instead of potentials and opportunities. This negative bias is
partly due to stereotypes and misconceptions of age at work and older workers. The goal of this
chapter is to provide an integrative account of extant knowledge on work and aging that corrects
existing misconceptions, emphasizes (partly neglected) potentials particularly of older workers,
and helps maximizing the opportunities of an aging workforce.

We begin with a review of key demographic trends related to workforce aging in the 21st
century, as well as their reasons and implications. Second, we present an overview of popular
age stereotypes that often determine how demographic changes are currently addressed in
organizations, partly leading to age discrimination. Third, we outline central theoretical
frameworks and methodological considerations in the field of work and aging. Fourth, we review
empirical findings on relationships between age and both workers’ capabilities and work
motivation, as well as work outcomes such as performance and occupational well-being. Based
on these concepts and findings, we derive evidence-based implications for an age-inclusive
human resource management (HRM) in organizations, as well as implications for individual
workers and society. To move research on aging at work forward, we conclude the chapter by
outlining desirable characteristics of future studies in this area.
Demographic Change: Reasons and Implications
The populations in nearly all countries and world regions are aging at a faster rate than
ever before in human history – yet there is great diversity in terms of their current and projected
proportions of older people (Phillips & Siu, 2012). Population aging is driven by low or falling
fertility rates (i.e., number of live births per woman) and continuous increases in life expectancy.
Due to improvements in health care, nutrition, lifestyles, safety, technologies, and workplaces,
the global average life expectancy has increased from 48 years in 1950 to 68 years in 2010 (L.
Roberts, 2011). Over the same period, life expectancies have increased in the United States from
69 to 78 years and in Europe from 66 to 75 years, with even greater proportional increases in
Africa and Asia. Global average life expectancy is predicted to further increase to 76 years in
2050 and 81 years in 2100 (Bloom, 2011). In more developed world regions, life expectancy is
likely to be 83 years in 2050 and 88 years in 2100, whereas in less developed regions it is likely
to be 75 years in 2050 and 80 years in 2100. Over the next decades, population aging in most
industrialized countries is further intensified by the aging of the large cohort of baby boomers
born between 1946 and 1964 (Alley & Crimmins, 2007).
A widely-used indicator to illustrate population aging is the potential support ratio (PSR),
which is calculated by dividing the number of people of traditional “working age” (i.e., 16-64
years) by the number of “older people” 65 and over. According to Gerland et al. (2014), the PSR
in the United States is expected to decline from currently 4.6 to 1.9 in 2100 (80% prediction
interval [PI]: 1.6-2.2), and in Germany from currently 2.9 to 1.4 in 2100 (80% PI: 1.1-1.7).
Especially in European countries such as Germany, Italy, and Spain, which have historically
different immigration patterns than the United States or Australia (cf. Zacher & Griffin, 2015),
the simultaneous aging and shrinking of populations will lead to shortages of skilled workers, as
well as an increased pressure on individual workers to prepare financially for retirement, as there
will not be enough people of working age to support them when they reach retirement age.
One potential solution to the shrinkages of qualified workers sometimes discussed is to
increase immigration, particularly from developing countries. Indeed, overall the world’s
population has increased exponentially over the last 200 years, more than doubled between 1960
and today (Bloom, 2011), and it is estimated that it will continue to grow for the remainder of the
21st century, increasing from 7.2 billion people today to 9.6 billion in 2050 and 10.9 billion in
2100 (80% PI: 9.6-12.3 billion; Gerland et al., 2014). While the populations of more developed
countries are expected to remain relatively stable or shrink in size (one exception is Australia;
Bloom, 2011; Zacher & Griffin, 2015), the largest share of population growth until 2050 (97%)
is taking place in Africa (which accounts for 49% of growth) as well as in China, India, and other
less developed countries. The ratio of total population size in developing countries compared to
that of developed countries was 2 to 1 in 1950, and is increasing to 6 to 1 by 2050 (L. Roberts,
2011). However, strikingly similar population aging trends to those in developed countries are
also expected in developing countries such as China and India, which at present are the most
populous countries in the world. For instance, the PSR in China is expected to decline from
currently 7.8 to 1.8 in 2100 (80% PI: 1.4-2.3), and in India from currently 10.9 to 2.3 in 2100
(80% PI: 1.5-3.2; Gerland et al., 2014). Thus, while in absolute terms these countries will
continue to have very large working populations, they are rapidly transforming into older
societies and will also face the challenges of population aging toward the end of the 21st century
(James, 2011; Peng, 2011). In the least developed countries (e.g., Ethiopia, Uganda), the PSRs
will also decrease over the next decades, but will still be above current PSRs in developed
countries (L. Roberts, 2011).
The aging of the workforces in most industrialized countries is not only influenced by
population aging, but also by changes in workforce participation patterns, including delayed
workforce entry as well as early or delayed retirement (Alley & Crimmins, 2007; Beehr &
Bennett, 2015; Martin & Xiang, 2015). Factors that influence workforce participation include
improved education and health, increased participation of women, changes in family structures,
the stability of economic conditions, availability of bridge employment and flexible retirement
options, as well as organizations’ attitudes and policies toward older workers (Alley &
Crimmins, 2007). Moreover, in developed countries, the proportionally fastest growth of the
“oldest old” demographic group (85 years and older) has implications for current members of the
workforce (Phillips & Siu, 2012). On the one hand, younger relatives (mostly daughters) may
decide to leave the workforce to provide care to the oldest old – or decide to combine work and
eldercare, which may negatively impact on their productivity (Zacher, Jimmieson, & Winter,
2012). On the other hand, the significant rise in the numbers of oldest old people can also create
opportunities, such as new jobs in health care and service sectors and the introduction of more
flexible working time models (Phillips & Siu, 2012).
Researchers have consistently emphasized that changes in the age structure of
populations and workforces may not only result in economic and societal challenges, but can
also open up many new opportunities for increased productivity and well-being (Bloom, 2011).
Changes in public policies, such as increases in retirement age, encouragement of workforce
participation of women, and enabling more flexible careers (including longer downtimes for
learning, family, or traveling) can strengthen the positive effects of population aging
(Carstensen, 2009; Staudinger, 2015). Vaupel and Loichinger (2006) argued that population
aging offers excellent possibilities to conduct policy-relevant research, for instance, studies on
how educational and work environments should be designed to improve older workers’
productivity and retention in the workforce, and how work can be better distributed across
people and different periods of the lifespan in order to help individuals’ combine work,
education, leisure, and family. Of course, such changes, together with research on how to reduce
work-related stressors and early exists from the workforce, also benefit younger workers,
therefore contributing to an overall humanization of the workplace.
Phillips and Siu (2012) suggested that organizational psychologists are in a particularly
good position to investigate how economic growth will be possible in the context of workforce
aging, as the abilities, needs, and acceptance of older workers are thought to play a central role in
this regard. Indeed, demographic change is likely to lead to a much stronger emphasis on the
work- and non-work interests (e.g., provision of child care) of the decreasing number of highly-
skilled employees in order to attract, motivate, and retain them. In a similar vein, Kulik, Ryan,
Harper, and George (2014) proposed that the challenges for organizational practice imposed by
population and workforce aging offer excellent opportunities for organizational psychologists
and management researchers who study how to make better use of older workers’ knowledge,
skills, and abilities and to better accommodate their changing needs (e.g., physically less
demanding tasks). In sum, the ongoing demographic changes provide excellent opportunities for
the improvement of both the organization and the distribution of work for more effective and
healthy employees. However, if and how these opportunities are used in organizations is partly
contingent on prevailing assumptions and stereotypes about aging and older workers.
Age Stereotypes and Age Discrimination
In spite of the opportunities of demographic developments described, and despite the
need and potential benefits of retaining older workers, the percentage of older workers in
organizations only slowly concur with the ongoing demographic changes. This slow adaptation
is partly due to stereotypes and myths about aging at work and older workers. Such popular
assumptions not only affect the expectations of managers and HRM professionals, but also how
older workers perceive themselves and act accordingly. Therefore, a thorough understanding and
critical reflection of prevailing age stereotypes is a key aspect of managing an aging workforce.
Activation of Age Stereotypes at Work
The age of a worker is an important aspect of general and often automatic assessments by
others. These assessments are influenced by age stereotypes, reflecting expectations and beliefs
about capabilities, attitudes, and behavior on the basis of chronological or perceived age (Levy,
2009; Posthuma & Campion, 2009). Age stereotypes are qualified by context conditions such as
job type or national culture, and gradually change over time. Empirical research of age
stereotypes at work (A. C. Bal, Reiss, Rudolph, & Baltes, 2011; Posthuma & Campion, 2009)
has revealed both positive and negative expectations and beliefs about older as well as younger
workers (cf. Table 1).The prevalence of these age stereotypes is usually in favor of younger
workers in industrialized countries, in line with a more general youth centeredness of Western
societies today, while being older is predominantly associated with negative connotations of
performance decreases, physical decline, dependency on others, and costs to society (Staudinger,
2015; Zacher, 2015).
< Insert Table 1 about here >
Interestingly, today only very few of these age stereotypes correspond with empirical
data, most others do not, and for some even the opposite seems to be true (Hertel, Van der
Heijden, et al., 2013; Ng & Feldman, 2012b, cf. Table 1). Therefore, reliance on age stereotypes
is often misleading and unduly reduces the employability of older workers. For instance,
contrary to the general assumption that older workers are more reluctant to change, a recent
study with more than 2,900 workers from different companies in Europe found a slight but
significant negative correlation between age and resistance to change (Kunze, Boehm, & Bruch,
2013; see also Ng & Feldman, 2012b, for meta-analytic evidence). Moreover, meta-analyses do
not support age stereotypes assuming older workers to be less motivated, less trusting, or more
vulnerable to work-family imbalance (Ng & Feldman, 2012b). Finally, neither job performance
nor emotional resilience have been shown to be generally related to age in meta-analyses (e.g.,
Ng & Feldman, 2008; Rauschenbach, Goritz, & Hertel, 2012). Thus, critical reflection and
empirical examination of popular assumptions about older workers and aging at work are crucial,
particularly as aging effects may have changed in the last decades due to improved work
conditions and health management. Indeed, some of the prevailing age stereotypes seem to
originate from work conditions some fifty years ago, with only slow adaptations to the current
situation. Moreover, observations of very old people (> 80 years of age) might be
overgeneralized to “older” workers. Such misperceptions are further stabilized by confirmation
biases that overstate information consistent and discount information inconsistent with age
stereotypes (Ng & Feldman, 2012b). Finally, self-stereotyping and stereotype threat among older
workers can cause behavior consistent with specific age stereotypes, supporting these stereotypes
as self-fulfilling prophecies (Finkelstein, King, & Voyles, 2015; Staudinger, 2015; Von Hippel,
Kalokerinos, & Henry, 2012).
The prevalence of age stereotypes is qualified by characteristics of the assessor, such as
age (Posthuma & Campion, 2009). Older as compared to younger assessors seem to be more
differentiated and sometimes more tolerant with both older and younger workers (Rauschenbach
et al., 2012), probably because they have been younger workers themselves, and therefore
possess more valid information to adopt their perspective of the other group (Finkelstein, Burke,
& Raju, 1995). A second group of moderators of age stereotypes at work include job
characteristics and job requirements. For instance, being a computer programmer might be seen
as more typical for younger workers, whereas being a doctor may be more typical for older
workers (Perry, Dokko, & Golom, 2012). Thus, jobs can also be “stereotyped” with regard to the
typical or appropriate age of job incumbents. Perry and Finkelstein (1999) suggested that the fit
between perceived job requirements and worker age might be an important predictor of
managers’ performance judgments, support, and rewards. However, empirical research supports
this assumption only for young- but not for old-typed jobs (Finkelstein et al., 1995). Finally,
older and younger workers also have different (and often false) assumptions of how they are
perceived by the respective other group (e.g., Finkelstein, Ryan, & King, 2013).
Age Stereotypes and Discrimination at Work

Although stereotypes are conceptually different from prejudice and discrimination (Fiske,
2004), negative stereotypes can be the starting point of discriminatory behavior at work, causing
strain (Sánchez Palacios, Torres, & Blanca Mena, 2009) and performance impediments for the
focused persons in addition to potential litigation costs (Ng & Feldman, 2012b). In addition,
managerial decisions about rewards and career opportunities might be distorted, reducing
organizational success. Finally, self-fulfilling prophecies and stereotype threat might hinder older
workers from releasing their full potential at work (Staudinger, 2015; Von Hippel et al., 2012;
Zaniboni, 2015). For instance, when confronted with low expectations from their supervisors,
older workers might expect their learning abilities to be low, which in turn might reduce their
interest in training activities. As a consequence, supervisors might perceive their pre-
assumptions confirmed. Indeed, the negative relation between age and training motivation can be
significantly buffered by supervisors’ favorable beliefs about older workers (Van Vianen,
Dalhoeven, & De Pater, 2011). Moreover, Greller and Stroh (2004) showed that negative
stereotypes about development ability play a central role in predicting motivation, and,
eventually, the retirement of older workers (see also Gaillard & Desmette, 2008). Thus, while a
negative correlation between workers’ age and their training motivation was the only confirmed
age stereotype in the meta-analysis by Ng and Feldman (2012b), this correlation can at least
partly be explained by self-fulfilling prophecies and stereotype threat mechanisms rather than
genuine aging effects. In summary, remedies against age discrimination are an important step for
managing an aging workforce.
Theories on Aging (at Work)
There is so far no single integrative theory of aging in psychology (B. B. Baltes, Rudolph,
& Bal, 2012; V. L. Bengtson, Gans, Putney, & Silverstein, 2009). Instead, different theories
focus on different phenomena contingent on chronological age (e.g., anticipating, learning,
deciding, and striving). Moreover, these processes are embedded in micro and macro processes
of aging described in models from biology and sociology (see B. B. Baltes et al., 2012; V. L.
Bengtson et al., 2009, for more details). We briefly summarize the main assumptions of the
(currently) most relevant theories in this field, starting with more general scientific approaches
and ending in specific theories from work and organizational psychology.
Aging from a Biological and Neurological Perspective
Biology and neurology describe aging processes at a micro-level, focusing on physical
body changes of individuals as a function of time or chronological age. Most of these theories
conceptualize aging as cumulative damage due to effects of environmental factors on
individuals’ organisms. Whereas stochastic theories consider these environmental damages to be
random, development-genetic theories assume that aging effects are genetically controlled by
biological mechanisms (e.g., secretion of hormones, declines of the immune system, effects of
free radicals; see B. B. Baltes et al., 2012, for a review). Nevertheless, redundancy in human
body systems can compensate for many of such environmental damages, for instance, by
replacing brain cells with cells from other areas, and thus contribute to functionality and higher
life expectancy (Park & Reuter-Lorenz, 2009). Biological theories have direct implications for
the estimation of workers’ physical strength, health, and resilience. Moreover, the experience of
biological changes affects the subjective experience of aging and outcomes such as well-being
and self-efficacy (Staudinger, 2015). Therefore, biological theories are important building blocks
for an understanding of psychological changes when workers age. Indeed, these theories are
often used to predict declines of work-related capabilities with higher age (Kanfer & Ackerman,
2004; Warr, 2001).

Age Effects from a Sociology and Economics Perspective
Sociologists and economists examine aging processes at a macro-level, considering the
embedment of aging processes in society and economic contexts. For instance, the specific
historical context with both negative (e.g., war, economic depression) and positive events and
developments (e.g., new education systems, technological discoveries, economic growth), affect
workers’ experiences and development in addition to mere bodily changes (P. B. Baltes, 1987;
Vl L. Bengtson, Putney, & Johnson, 2005). These differences in historical or economical context
can help explain differences in the societal perception (and stereotyping) of older workers,
varying considerably across different time periods (e.g., 1900 as compared to 2000) or cultures
(e.g., United States as compared to Japan). Interestingly, these societal expectations are not
always fitting to the existing structures and requirements of organizations. The current misfit
between age stereotypes and the need to retain older workers in many countries is a good
example. Moreover, stability and wealth of economic systems together with political decisions
(e.g., on retirement age) determine work time perspectives and retirement decisions of workers.
Sociology and economics describe such context conditions as important complements for a more
holistic and complete picture of aging processes at work (Mayer, 2009).
Together, biological theories and theories from sociology and economics describe
important framework conditions in which aging at work takes place. Consequently, both
biological processes (mostly decreasing resources) and context conditions in work organizations
(often detrimental for older workers) influence aging at work. However, it should be noted that
workers not only react to biological aging and social context conditions but also influence
context conditions in their work organizations, for instance by changing organizational policies
and age-related climate, by job crafting and requests for age-inclusive job design (Heckhausen,
Wrosch, & Schulz, 2010). While biological aging processes cannot be stopped or reversed
entirely, individual workers do have considerable control how fast biological functions relevant
for work ability wear out, for instance, by specific risk and health management at work, but also
by maintaining a healthy and active lifestyle in general. These activities should be supported by
employers and organizations as part of management an aging workforce.
Aging from a Psychological Perspective
Psychological aging theories focus on individuals’ experience of aging, both in reaction
to as well as in anticipation of time-related changes. In doing so, they consider both bodily
changes described in biological approaches of aging as well as the social (and societal) context in
which aging takes place, as described in sociological and economics perspectives. Moreover, a
genuine psychological approach towards aging includes the individual anticipation of and
reactions to these bodily changes and context conditions. Thus, psychological models address the
perception and coping with the fact that time (a limited resource) is passing. Next, we describe
the main ideas of psychological theories of aging, and link them to work-related processes.
Lifespan Development Theories. The general idea of lifespan development theories is
that humans face different challenges across their individual lifespan that require learning and
adaptation as well as decisions about changing resources (P. B. Baltes, 1987). These challenges
occur due to the ongoing interplay of both individuals’ abilities and needs and environmental
requirements and resources. However, in contrast to early conceptualizations of developmental
stages in theories on child development (e.g., Piaget, 1947), theories of development during
adulthood – which are particularly relevant for aging at work – are still rare. One early prominent
approach covering the whole lifespan was introduced by Erikson (1950), suggesting eight
specific stages of psychosocial development during which individuals have to negotiate between
biological forces and sociocultural requirements. Four of these stages are placed in the usual
lifespan at work, and include central themes and developmental tasks such as developing a work-
related identity (late adolescence), committing to long-term relationships (young adulthood),
taking responsibility for others both at work and in private life (“generativity”; middle
adulthood), and becoming a retired person (late adulthood). While the age range for each stage
can vary, for instance, when it takes more time to achieve skills needed for a specific stage (e.g.,
longer education times in industrialized societies), the different developmental tasks provide
potential for high satisfaction at different points in life. Indeed, recent research has revealed
generativity as an important work value particularly of older workers (Hertel, Thielgen, et al.,
2013; Kooij et al., 2011).
Instead of discrete developmental stages, more recent lifespan development approaches
describe continuous processes that vary in their relative importance. The lifespan theory of
control (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995) conceptualizes age differences in the relative importance
of two basic mechanisms of self-control. Primary control strategies are directed at the external
environment in order to fulfill individual needs. Secondary control strategies refer to
intrapersonal changes of thinking and feeling in order to compensate, maintain, or expand
existing levels of primary control (see also Brandtstädter & Renner, 1990, for a similar
conceptualization of assimilation of and accommodation to the environment). Age-contingent
primary control strategies are assumed to follow an inverted U-shape pattern, with growing
primary control during adolescence and young adulthood, a plateau during adulthood, and a
decline during late adulthood when both internal resources and external resources diminish.
Secondary control, in contrast, is assumed to increase constantly during the lifespan, reflecting
growing self-management skills. The lifespan theory of control and the more recent motivational
theory of lifespan development (Heckhausen et al., 2010) provide important building blocks for
understanding age-related changes of motivation and self-regulation at work (e.g., Hertel,
Rauschenbach, Thielgen, & Krumm, 2015; Scheibe & Zacher, 2013).
A second group of lifespan development theories emphasize goal orientations and
behavior coordination as central age-contingent processes. The general idea is again that
changing biological resources and sociocultural opportunities require individuals to change their
strategies for successful development. Among the most prominent examples is the selection,
optimization, and compensation (SOC) model developed by P. B. Baltes and Baltes (1990).
According to this model, behavioral strategies of selection (choosing alternative contexts,
outcomes, or goals), optimization (allocation or refinement of resources to achieve goals), and
compensation (replacing activities that are no longer achievable) should be used more frequently
when people age in order to cope with declining resources and capabilities. Illustrating the SOC
strategies, P. B. Baltes and Baltes (1990, p. 26) refer to a television interview with the famous
concert pianist Arthur Rubinstein, who maintained high levels of artistic performance even at a
high age. Being asked how he compensated for age-related declines of motor speed and
flexibility, Rubinstein answered that he now plays fewer pieces (selection) and practices these
pieces more often (optimization). Moreover, prior to fast parts that are difficult to play, he now
slows down his speed so that the following part appears faster, using contrast effects as
compensation strategy.
While the SOC model has been initially validated in research across the entire lifespan,
recent studies have also shown their relevance in work contexts (Bajor & Baltes, 2003; B. B.
Baltes & Heydens-Gahir, 2003; Schmitt, Zacher, & Frese, 2012; Weigl, Müller, Hornung,
Zacher, & Angerer, 2013; Wiese, Freund, & Baltes, 2000; Yeung & Fung, 2009; Zacher & Frese,
2011). For instance, Weigl et al. (2013) demonstrated that older nurses in hospitals report
significantly fewer health problems when using SOC strategies. While age was generally
negatively related to work ability, older nurses who used SOC strategies had about the same
level of work ability as their younger colleagues. These results are promising also with respect to
potential applications of the SOC model in training activities.
Similar to the SOC model, socio-emotional selectivity theory (SST; e.g., Carstensen,
2006) considers behavioral consequences of aging in terms of changes in goal priorities.
However, SST describes aging predominantly in terms of subjective perceptions of (remaining)
time rather than changing biological or contextual resources. According to SST, individuals
select goals and priorities as a function of the future time they perceive. When future time is
perceived as unlimited, information acquisition and expanding social networks are more strongly
prioritized. However, when future time is increasingly perceived as constrained, feelings and
emotional well-being are more strongly emphasized, and people focus on the present rather than
the future (Carstensen, Isaacowitz, & Charles, 1999). This idea is similar to rational choice
models, assuming that persons (consciously or unconsciously) calculate potential returns of their
investments. When future time is unlimited, it is beneficial to invest in learning activities that
might pay off in the future. However, when future time and potential benefits from learned skills
are constrained, investing in costly learning activities might not be reasonable.
Notably, the focus of SST on psychological perceptions instead of biological resources or
societal opportunities provides interesting opportunities for the prevention of some negative
aging effects. For instance, the prospect of being able to work as a coach or trainer after
retirement might increase learning motivation of older workers. Moreover, while other lifespan
models usually refer to chronological age, SST can be adopted to different domains
irrespectively of chronological age. For instance, when applied to remaining time in a specific
job (e.g., Zacher & Frese, 2009), perceptions of limited future time and related behavioral
implications may apply also to young persons, for instance when working on a contract base.
Recently, SST has often been applied in work and organizational psychology research, for
instance to predict age-related changes in work motivation (Hertel, Thielgen, et al., 2013;
Truxillo, Cadiz, Rineer, Zaniboni, & Fraccaroli, 2012), job attitudes (Ng & Feldman, 2010;
Thielgen, Krumm, Rauschenbach, & Hertel, 2015), or reactions to performance feedback (Wang,
Burlacu, Truxillo, James, & Yao, 2015). For instance, SST explains why the fit between
workers’ motives and characteristics of their job (need-supply fit) is more important for older
than for younger workers (Krumm, Grube, & Hertel, 2013b).
Partly building on and extending the SST, Charles (2010) introduced the strength and
vulnerability integration model (SAVI) that considers age-contingent strengths and weaknesses
in emotion regulation in addition to predictions of SST. An important strength of older persons is
the accumulated knowledge from life experience about how to regulate emotions and social
contacts (Blanchard-Fields, 2007). SAVI postulates that these skills should enable older persons
to regulate relatively low levels of stressors better than younger persons, and to better avoid
negative experiences. However, a decreasing flexibility of older persons’ biological systems
should make regulation of high physiological arousal more difficult. Therefore, older persons are
assumed to have more difficulties maintaining their well-being under high levels of stressors,
particularly if these high stressors persist over time. Initial empirical evidence shows promising
results for these different predictions with respect to general life satisfaction (Charles, 2010;
Charles & Carstensen, 2010); however, research applying SAVI in the field of work and
organizational psychology is still lacking (for an initial example, see Scheibe & Zacher, 2013).
Theories on Cognitive Development. Perhaps the most popular research findings on
aging effects relevant for work refer to changes in cognitive capabilities. Based on dual-
component theories of human intelligence (Cattell, 1943), early cross-sectional research
suggested that fluid intelligence, which involves working memory, abstract reasoning, and
solving of novel problems, increases until early adulthood (mid-twenties) and declines slowly
thereafter. In contrast, crystallized intelligence, that is, general knowledge, vocabulary, and
verbal comprehension, has been shown to increase constantly until high ages (Salthouse, 2012).
The early decline of fluid intelligence was attributed to production deficiencies (i.e., older
persons being less able to show their capabilities) or processing deficiencies due to biological
processes (i.e., older persons loosing processing speed), with the latter account receiving more
empirical evidence (Salthouse, 2013). However, these results have been criticized on
methodological grounds, for instance, a high reliance on cross-sectional research designs that
might suffer from cohort effects due to different learning environments. Indeed, longitudinal
research (e.g., Schaie, 2013) suggests that decreases in fluid intelligence generally occur much
later in life, and might increasingly fan out with higher age. Moreover, the measures of fluid
intelligence might disadvantage older persons because the tasks are more similar to tasks trained
in school than usual tasks in regular jobs (Ackerman, 1996). In sum, the distinction between fluid
and crystallized intelligence has been helpful to integrate different age-contingent trajectories in
cognitive capabilities; however, recent research seems to suggest that age-effects are not as
imperative as is often assumed.
Theories on Personality Development. While temporal stability was often considered as
a defining feature of personality traits (e.g., P. T. Costa & McCrae, 1994), this has been
criticized for various reasons (e.g., Mischel, 1969, for a prominent early critique). More recent
approaches now discuss temporal variability and development of personality characteristics (B.
W. Roberts, 2009). Driving forces of such development can be both biological processes (e.g.,
changes in the serotonergic and dopaminergic systems; DeYoung, Peterson, & Higgins, 2002) as
well as environmental factors (e.g., enduring stress at work affecting cognition, emotion, and
behavior; B. W. Roberts & Wood, 2006). Moreover, systematic age effects can be predicted
based on lifespan theories. For instance, the general shift of older persons toward emotion
regulation strategies to reduce negative affect, as predicted by SAVI (Charles, 2010), might
potentially buffer life stressors, leading to lower levels of neuroticism. In a similar way,
establishing more satisfying and supportive relationships with higher age, as predicted by SST
(Carstensen, 2006), might also reduce overall levels of neuroticism (Soto & John, 2012) as well
as openness to new experience (Staudinger, 2015). Indeed, empirical studies have shown that
during the usual work-life of adults (i.e., ages between 20 and 65), neuroticism and openness
decrease slightly whereas conscientiousness (particularly self-discipline and reliability, but not
orderliness) as well as agreeableness increase slightly. However, there is also evidence for
considerable between-person variability as well as for narrow mechanisms acting at the level of
personality facets rather than at the level of higher order factors (B. W. Roberts & Mroczek,
2008; B. W. Roberts, Walton, & Viechtbauer, 2006; Soto & John, 2012; Staudinger, 2015).
Age in Work and Organizational Psychology Theories
Theoretical approaches in work and organizational psychology usually considered
chronological age as a control variable rather than as a substantive construct. Although age
differences at work have been addressed in earlier research, for instance, on stereotyping (Rosen
& Jerdee, 1976), work values (Super, 1980), work attitudes (Rhodes, 1983), expertise (Gordon &
Johnson, 1982), or job performance (Waldman & Avolio, 1986), this initial research was rather
atheoretical (Kacmar & Ferris, 1989). One reason might be a more general neglect of time and
time-related changes in work and organizational psychology theories (Roe, 2008; Sonnentag,
2012). Moreover, addressing changes over time empirically requires laborious longitudinal
studies. Finally, neglecting workers’ age is in line with a general youth centeredness and
disrespect of older workers in industrialized societies. However, neglecting age and time renders
work and organizational psychology theories unspecific and imprecise. The frequent reliance on
younger adults (e.g., students) in empirical research might even lead to wrong conclusions.
In the last few years, the consequences of demographic changes in many organizations
(increasing average age of workers, increasing age diversity, increasing need for qualified
professionals) as well as industrialized societies (challenged pension systems) have triggered
many research programs on age at work. Moreover, established theories from work and
organizational psychology have been fruitfully connected with lifespan models of age-related
changes, providing more differentiated theoretical approaches for this evolving research. As one
of the first examples, Warr (1993) predicted age differences in job performance integrating
theories on work characteristics and age-related changes in cognitive capabilities. Negative age
effects were predicted in jobs with continuous and paced data-processing and rapid learning, and
positive age effects in jobs with knowledge-based judgments with no time pressure. Moreover,
Warr (2001) pointed out that age-related changes also affect self-efficacy perceptions of workers,
leading to (mostly negative) implications of aging for work motivation, such as habituation to
incentives (“hedonic treadmill”), development of routines and habits that might impede
innovation, and social comparison with younger colleagues.
Extending this approach, Kanfer and Ackerman (2004) proposed moderating effects of
worker age on perceived contingencies between effort, utilities, and performance. For instance,
age is expected to decrease the perceived contingency between effort and performance outcomes
in jobs that require high levels of fluid intelligence (e.g., air traffic controller), but increase this
contingency in jobs that require high levels of crystallized intelligence (e.g., elementary school
teachers; cf. Kanfer & Ackerman, 2004, p. 449). Moreover, age is assumed to decrease the
perceived contingency between effort and subjective utility at work because career perspectives
and related achievement motives decline with age. Kanfer, Beier, and Ackerman (2013) further
differentiated these thoughts for different types of motivation (i.e., motivation to work,
motivation at work, and motivation to retire), considering intrapersonal factors (e.g., self-
efficacy, attitudes, personality), context variables (e.g., finances, health), work conditions (e.g.,
autonomy, age climate), and societal/economic context variables (e.g., retirement policies) (see
also Ng & Feldman, 2013b). In contrast to the common perspective that fluid and crystallized
intelligence are independent resources that might compensate each other, McDaniel, Pesta, and
Banks (2012) pointed out that fluid and crystallized intelligence are positively related at work
because fluid intelligence is conducive to accumulating knowledge and skills over time.
In addition to age-related differences in motivation and performance, researchers have
started to integrate age-related changes in models of occupational health and well-being. For
instance, Scheibe and Zacher (2013) integrated models of stress and affective experiences at
work with lifespan models of emotion regulation. According to their model, age and age-related
emotional competencies should not only affect the initial appraisal of work events and the
management of stress and emotions during these events, but also the types and frequency of
work events encountered. As a consequence, older as compared to younger workers should be
less affected by social stressors due to better coping strategies. However, older workers are also
expected to be more vulnerable to extreme job stressors, such as highly intense and/or prevailing
stressors. Zacher, Feldman, and Schulz (2014) extended these predictions by a person-
environment fit perspective, integrating changing job demands (e.g., increasing learning
requirements) with age-related person changes, resulting in implications for age-inclusive job
design and staffing. In general, congruency between workers’ age-related strengths and task
requirements seems to be not only conducive for high job performance (Kanfer & Ackerman,
2004; Warr, 1993), but also for health and well-being at work (Krumm et al., 2013b; Scheibe,
Stamov-Roßnagel, & Zacher, 2015; Truxillo et al., 2012).
Methodological Issues in Research on Work and Aging
In this section, we discuss two categories of important methodological issues in research
on work and aging. First, we focus on the measurement of age and age-related constructs in
organizational research. Second, we outline considerations for research design in the field of
work and aging (see also Baird, Pitzer, Russell, & Bergeman, 2012; Shultz & Adams, 2007b).
Measurement
Most research on work and aging has defined and operationalized age as chronological
age, that is, the time individuals have lived since birth (Schwall, 2012). Reasons for using
chronological age include that it is easily measured, is based on the same underlying metric as
change over time (i.e., months or years), and is widely used and accepted by organizational
practitioners and policy makers. Alternative conceptualizations of age, including functional,
organizational, subjective/psychological, social, and relative age, have been discussed, and initial
studies have shown that these variables exhibit incremental validity above and beyond
chronological age in predicting work outcomes (Barnes-Farrell, Rumery, & Swody, 2002;
Cleveland, Shore, & Murphy, 1997; Kooij, De Lange, Jansen, & Dikkers, 2008; Schwall, 2012).
However, it appears that many of these alternative age definitions overlap to a great extend with
established age-related constructs such as job and organizational tenure, experience, physical
health, cognitive functioning, positive affectivity, and age differences/diversity. In any case, it is
now generally considered good practice in research on work and aging, including meta-analyses
(e.g., Ng & Feldman, 2013c; Sturman, 2003), to statistically control for other time-related
variables such as job tenure. Related to this issue, researchers have argued that work and aging
research is not advanced by only examining employee age as a moderator variable; studies,
therefore, should also examine mediators of the moderating effects of age (for recent examples,
see P. M. Bal, de Lange, Zacher, & van der Heijden, 2013; Wang et al., 2015; Zacher, 2013).
A common question refers to the definition of “older workers” (Ashbaugh & Fay, 1987).
While some studies use arbitrary cut-offs specified by legislation or advocacy groups to define
older workers (e.g., 40 or 60 years; United Nations, 2007; United States Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission, 2014), most current research on work and aging follows the lifespan
psychology approach (P. B. Baltes, 1987) and recommendations by methodologists (MacCallum,
Zhang, Preacher, & Rucker, 2002) and investigates employee age as a continuous variable,
typically ranging from 18 to 65 years and older. In this research, labels such as “younger” and
“older workers” are used for descriptive purposes only. Importantly, even within the group of
older workers (e.g., defined as those 50 years and older), age defined as a continuous variable
can explain meaningful amounts of variance in work outcomes (Zacher, 2013).
While most previous research examines linear relationships between age and work
outcomes, it is important to note that the relationships between age and work outcomes may also
be curvilinear, with mid-career workers differing from or being more similar to either young or
older workers. For instance, research has shown that occupational well-being has a U-shaped
relationship with age (Clark, Oswald, & Warr, 1996; Zacher, Jimmieson, & Bordia, 2014), and
that task performance has an inverted U-shaped relationship with age in less complex jobs
(McDaniel et al., 2012; Sturman, 2003). Thus, when examining age as predictor or moderator
variable, considering potential curvilinear effects is recommended.
Developmental researchers have argued for a long time that age per se is not an
explanatory variable. Therefore, researchers are well-advised to consider the age-related
mechanisms that predict work outcomes, such as physical, cognitive, motivational, and affective
factors, instead of treating age as a causal variable; particularly as variance in most of
individuals’ experiences and behaviors steadily increases after adolescence and as employees
grow older, rendering the age variable less and less informative over time (Bowen et al., 2011;
Staudinger, 2015). Importantly, relevant age-related mechanisms include not only person-related
factors but also contextual factors on different conceptual levels (e.g., job, team, organization)
and non-work factors (e.g., family, community) which may change with age over time (Zacher,
Feldman, et al., 2014). Psychological research on work and aging has so far mainly focused on
age-related person mechanisms and largely neglected contextual factors as explanations, with the
exception of age discrimination (Shultz & Adams, 2007b; Zacher, Feldman, et al., 2014).
Finally, reliability and validity of measures should be the same for younger and older
employees in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies on work and age. When longitudinal data is
collected, researchers need to ensure that the psychometric properties of their measures do not
change over time and contaminate potential aging effects. This can be demonstrated by testing
for measurement invariance of latent factor loadings and relationships among factors across time
(Hertzog & Nesselroade, 2003; Horn & McArdle, 1992; Krumm et al., 2013b). Moreover, it is
important to avoid test-experience effects in longitudinal studies, which can occur when
participants are tested repeatedly with the same measure (Salthouse, 2014).
Research Design
Most research on work and aging to date (including meta-analyses) has relied on cross-
sectional research designs, which compare employees of different ages at a single point in time
(Shultz & Adams, 2007b). Cross-sectional studies are not suited to investigate the process of
aging at work, which involves intraindividual changes in employees’ experiences and behaviors
over time (Lindenberger, Von Oertzen, Ghisletta, & Hertzog, 2011). Moreover, cross-sectional
designs do not allow researchers to disentangle aging effects from alternative explanations such
as cohort, measurement period, and selection (or “healthy worker”) effects (Hofer & Piccinin,
2010). Implicitly or explicitly, however, most cross-sectional research on work and age
conducted to date is based on the assumption that age differences observed at one point in time
are the result of intraindividual age-related changes across the working lifespan (Ng & Feldman,
2013b). While cross-sectional findings on age differences in work outcomes can be theoretically
consistent with the notion of intraindividual age-related change over time, they cannot provide
definite empirical evidence for such change. For cross-sectional age differences to be consistent
with intraindividual changes, researchers have to assume that cohort, period, and selection
effects do not exist and that short-term intraindividual variability and measurement error did not
bias the results (Li & Schmiedek, 2002; Zacher, 2015). However, it is important to note that
findings based on cross-sectional designs can be practically important for organizations that have
to manage age differences regardless of the causes for these differences.
Longitudinal research designs, in which the same participants are assessed repeatedly
over time, are necessary to examine intraindividual age-related changes as well as interindividual
differences in change patterns (P. B. Baltes & Nesselroade, 1979; Ferrer & McArdle, 2010).
These studies can range from several months (e.g., across critical career transitions) to decades;
however, longitudinal studies covering employees’ partial or entire working lifespans are rare
(Judge & Hurst, 2008; Ng & Feldman, 2008). Research on successful aging at work involves
investigating the person-related and contextual resources (and the absence of respective
constraints) that explain increased heterogeneity in work experiences and behaviors with age and
over time, and help employees maintain or improve positive work outcomes (Hansson,
DeKoekkoek, Neece, & Patterson, 1997; Zacher, 2015). Longitudinal data on successful aging at
work can be analyzed using sophisticated approaches such as multi-level (or random coefficient)
modeling, time series and survival analyses, as well as latent growth curve and latent change
score models (Ferrer & McArdle, 2010; Hertzog & Nesselroade, 2003; McArdle, 2009).
However, longitudinal designs also suffer from some limitations, including their inability to rule
out alternative explanations due to cohort effects, selective sampling and drop-out, as well as
retest effects; these limitations can be largely overcome by conducting cohort-sequential designs
with continuous resampling (Baird et al., 2012). Unfortunately, longitudinal and cohort-
sequential research on work and aging is time consuming and expensive (Ng & Feldman, 2008).
A possible alternative is the use of archival data sets such as the Hourehold Income and Labour
Dynamics in Australia Study, the Health and Retirement Study in the United States, and the
Socioeconomic Panel Study in Germany (e.g., Biemann, Zacher, & Feldman, 2012; Fisher et al.,
2014; Heybroek, Haynes, & Baxter, 2015; Warren, 2015).
Only controlled randomized experimental designs can yield strong conclusions about
causal effects on successful aging outcomes. An ideal study would involve random assignment
of participants to an experimental and a control group, strict control of the treatment, and
monitoring of the outcome variable across (parts of) the working lifespan (Salthouse, 2006).
However, such a research design would not only be highly impractical but also unethical. Thus,
developmental researchers recommend applying approximations of this ideal study design as
well as using data gathered with multiple different methodological approaches, including cross-
sectional, longitudinal, intervention, and quasi-experimental designs (Hertzog, Kramer, Wilson,
& Lindenberger, 2009; Salthouse, 2006). Finally, a relatively recent methodological innovation
in research on aging (and work and aging) is the experience sampling approach, which allows
capturing short-term intraindividual fluctuations and change indicative of older people’s
plasticity in functioning (Beal, 2012; Ram & Gerstorf, 2009). In combination with longitudinal
data collection across several years, this approach has also been called “measurement burst
design” (Ram, Gerstorf, Lindenberger, & Smith, 2011). For instance, Ram et al. (2011) showed
that higher levels of cognitive plasticity, lower cardiovascular variability, and emotional
diversity across two weeks were positively related to successful cognitive aging over 13 years.
Empirical Results on Age Differences in Employee and Work Outcomes
After describing the theoretical and methodological basics of research on aging at work,
we now turn to a review of empirically established age differences in the work context (see Table
2 for an overview).
Cognitive Abilities
Cognitive abilities have received a great deal of attention in the field of work and aging,
because age seems to be reliably associated with different cognitive abilities which, in turn, are
important predictors of task performance at work (Kanfer & Ackerman, 2004; Müller et al.,
2015; Salthouse, 2012). Most research in this area is based on the distinction between fluid and
crystallized intelligence introduced earlier. Studies show that crystallized intelligence is
relatively stable or increasing across the working lifespan. In contrast, cross-sectional studies
typically show that fluid intellectual abilities peak in the mid-20s and then decrease with age,
with more accelerated decline after age 50 (Verhaeghen & Salthouse, 1997). For instance, Klein,
Dilchert, Ones, and Dages (2015) showed that older executives scored higher on verbal ability
(an indicator of crystallized intelligence) and lower figural and inductive reasoning (indicators of
fluid intelligence) than younger executives. However, longitudinal studies found a much later
onset (around age 60) and more gradual declines in fluid abilities than cross-sectional studies,
with more pronounced declines in later adulthood (Schaie, 2013).
Based on the longitudinal findings on fluid intelligence trajectories, and the compensatory
role of crystallized intelligence, McDaniel et al. (2012) advised researchers to be cautious when
applying results from the cognitive aging literature to older employees because cognitive
declines are unlikely to have a noticeable impact on functioning at work in this age range.
Moreover, improvements in cognitive functioning of up to 1.5 standard deviations across
consecutive birth cohorts within 50 years (i.e., the “Flynn effect”; e.g., Staudinger, 2015) suggest
that today’s older employees have, on average, higher levels of cognitive functioning than older
employees a few decades ago, and these cohort effects are likely to continue in the future due to
sociocultural changes (Gerstorf, Ram, Hoppmann, Willis, & Schaie, 2011; Salthouse, 2015;
Skirbekk, Stonawski, Bonsang, & Staudinger, 2013).
There is also evidence from both cross-sectional and longitudinal studies demonstrating
considerable interindividual variation in older adults’ level of cognitive functioning and
cognitive aging trajectories. Reviews on successful cognitive aging suggest that maintaining an
intellectually, physically, and socially active lifestyle as well as cognitive and physical exercise
interventions can have meaningful short-term effects on older adults’ cognitive functioning, and
slow down the rate of cognitive decline (Au et al., 2014; Hertzog et al., 2009). Research further
suggests that older adults’ cognitive performance is more consistent and varies less across days,
despite the different average levels of cognitive performance compared to younger adults
(Schmiedek, Lövdén, & Lindenberger, 2013). These findings question the notion of a general
cognitive decline with age, highlighting considerable interindividual differences between aging
adults as well as intraindividual plasticity in functioning up until old age (Staudinger, 2015).
Research on cognitive aging at work has focused on two major issues. In the first stream,
researchers have examined the interplay between age-related differences in cognitive functioning
and work demands and resources on outcomes such as work motivation and performance (Beier
& Kanfer, 2013; Kanfer & Ackerman, 2004; Salthouse, 2012). Most studies in this area so far
were conducted using actual or simulated air traffic control tasks. In this occupation, the
demands on fluid intellectual abilities such as working memory, speed and interference control,
as well as divided and selective attention are very high and therefore age is typically negatively
related to the task performance (e.g., accuracy; Taylor, O'Hara, Mumenthaler, Rosen, &
Yesavage, 2005). However, studies have shown that this negative relationship can be buffered by
high levels of crystallized intelligence and reliance on environmental supports. For instance,
experimental research using air traffic control tasks has shown that the effects of age-related
declines in fluid intelligence on complex task performance can be mitigated by task-specific
experience and compensatory means such as note taking (Morrow et al., 2003; Nunes & Kramer,
2009). Recent field research suggested that age-related changes in cognitive ability only impact
on older workers’ performance when job demands are high and job control is low (Müller et al.,
2015). In sum, the findings is this research stream suggest that older employees can maintain
high levels of performance in complex jobs if they possess relevant experience and the work
environment is designed to buffer age-related declines in fluid intelligence.

In the second line of research on work and cognitive aging, lifespan psychologists and
gerontologists have examined effects of job and occupational characteristics on individuals’ level
of cognitive functioning and age-related trajectories of cognitive functioning before and after
retirement, and well into old age. Based on the “use it or lose it” hypothesis (Salthouse, 2006),
this research investigates whether the mental challenges employees encounter at work and across
the working lifespan (e.g., cognitively stimulating job characteristics) buffer against age-related
cognitive decline and dementia in later adulthood. Then et al. (2014) conducted a review of 17
high-quality studies examining the influence of psychosocial work conditions on the
development of cognitive functioning and dementia over time. They concluded that there is
substantial evidence for protective effects of high levels of job complexity, cognitively
demanding work conditions, and job control on the risk of cognitive decline and dementia in
later adulthood. Thus, this research suggests that work design may have more than short-term
effects as it can help maintain individuals’ cognitive abilities in later phases of the lifespan.
An example for research in this area is the seminal work by Schooler and colleagues.
Building on research initiated in the 1970s, Schooler, Mulatu, and Oates (2004) showed that the
level of “occupational self-directedness” (i.e., job complexity, routinization, and closeness of
supervision) had a positive lagged effect on intellectual functioning and self-directed personality
orientation 20 years later. A more recent study by Fisher et al. (2014) came to similar
conclusions. Using 18-year longitudinal data from the Health and Retirement Study, the
researchers examined the development of cognitive functioning before and after retirement.
Their findings showed that working in an occupation characterized by high mental job demands
was positively related to employees’ cognitive functioning before retirement, and had a small but
reliable protective effect on individuals’ rate of cognitive decline after retirement.

In summary, research on work and cognitive aging is burgeoning. Important tasks for
future research in this area are to provide empirical evidence for the proposed interactive effects
of employee age, cognitive functioning, and different job demands on job performance, and to
conceptually integrate the hitherto disconnected streams in the fields of organizational and
lifespan psychology. With respect to risks, jobs low in complexity appear to be disadvantageous
to aging employees, as they do not allow for compensation through acquired job knowledge and
may contribute to age-related cognitive decline later in life. In contrast, the design of complex,
knowledge-based jobs seems to present an opportunity to maintain older employees’ effective
functioning at work and even contributes to cognitive functioning in old age.
Occupational Health and Workability
A common stereotype suggests that older employees have lower levels of occupational
health than younger employees (Jex, Wang, & Zarubin, 2007; Maertens, Putter, Chen, Diehl, &
Huang, 2012). However, according to a recent meta-analysis by Ng and Feldman (2013a), this
stereotype was only partially supported. Employee age was weakly to moderately related to
objective measures of physical ill-health such as blood pressure (ρ = .34), cholesterol level (ρ =
.20), and body mass index (ρ = .21), as well as to self-reported measures of insomnia (ρ = .12),
and muscle pain (ρ = .14). In contrast, age was unrelated to overall subjective physical health (ρ
= .00), somatic and psychosomatic complaints (ρs = .02 and .03, respectively), depression (ρ = -
.03), and anxiety (ρ = -.01), and weakly negatively related to mental health (ρ = -.05), fatigue (ρ
= -.10), negative mood (ρ = -.10), anger (ρ = -.15), and irritation (ρ = -.09). The findings of this
meta-analysis, however, have to be interpreted in light of the primary studies’ cross-sectional
designs (which do not allow ruling out cohort and selection or “healthy worker” effects) as well
as restriction in the range of employee ages included (18-58 years, with only 6 of 198 studies
including employees who had an average age of over 50 years).
Generally, the aging process goes along with declines in different physiological and
physical abilities (e.g., sensory, muscle, cardiovascular, respiratory, neurological, and immune
system functions), and with great interindividual variation in aging trajectories. These changes
may impact on employees’ occupational health and well-being, including safety outcomes such
as injuries and accidents (for a comprehensive review, see Maertens et al., 2012). Compensatory
employee behaviors as well as organizational interventions such as job redesign, health
promotion, and improvements in safety climate can help weaken the association between age-
related physiological and physical changes and occupational health outcomes (Jex et al., 2007).
Moreover, research in the field of cognitive epidemiology suggests that age-related physical and
cognitive changes are related; for instance, employees’ GMA has been shown to predict older
employees’ physical and mental health outcomes as well as mortality (McDaniel et al., 2012;
Salthouse, 2012). Overall, research suggests that organizational interventions to maintain
cognitive functioning and occupational health among older employees (e.g., designing mentally
stimulating and ergonomic jobs) or to train compensatory behaviors (e.g., physical exercise) may
help protect employees from age-related decline in physical, mental, and social well-being.
The concept of work ability captures employees’ ability to carry out their work with
regard to physical and psychological job demands and resources, and its proponents consider it
to be a holistic occupational health construct that is crucial in relation to the aging workforce
(Ilmarinen, 2009). Interestingly, work ability is conceptually closely related to the well-
established notion of demands-abilities fit in the person-environment fit literature, which has so
far largely neglected the role of age (Feldman & Vogel, 2009; Perry et al., 2012; Zacher,
Feldman, et al., 2014). Initial studies on work ability were conducted with older municipal
employees in Finland, and demonstrated increased interindividual variation in work ability with
age and identified several occupational characteristics that predicted work ability across an 11-
year period (Tuomi, Ilmarinen, Martikainen, Aalto, & Klockars, 1997). Since the 1990s, work
ability has been primarily investigated in European countries (which are currently aging at a
faster rate than, for instance, the United States), and it has become a popular concept among
organizational practitioners in these countries. Based on this concept, the Work Ability Index
(Tuomi et al., 1997) assesses two independent dimensions: people’s reports of more objective
health indicators (i.e., diagnosed diseases, functional impairments), and people’s subjective
perceptions of their work ability (Martus, Jakob, Rose, Seibt, & Freude, 2010).
An example for more recent research on work ability is a study by Costa and Sartori
(2007), which found that the negative relationship between Italian workers’ age and self-
perceived work ability was weaker in jobs with high mental involvement, high job autonomy,
and low physical demands. Another study with German employees showed that the generally
negative relationship between age and supervisor ratings of work ability was buffered by job
autonomy and action regulation strategies (Weigl et al., 2013). Finally, a paper with three studies
including employees in the United States did not find consistent support for a negative
relationship between age and perceived work ability, possibly due to restriction in age range
(McGonagle, Fisher, Barnes‐Farrell, & Grosch, 2015). Interestingly, however, perceived work
ability had consistent lagged effects on absenteeism, retirement, and disability leave in the
studies.
Work ability appears to be a promising new concept in the area of occupational health
and aging. Further research is needed that examines the conceptual overlap of work ability with
established person-job fit constructs, and further probes the association between age and work
ability, with a particular focus on predictors of interindividual differences in age-related
trajectories of work ability over time. This research should also include job tenure as a
potentially important mediating variable, as work ability may not necessarily decrease with age,
but with time spent working under certain job conditions.
Work Motivation
In addition to cognitive and physical capabilities, work motivation and related job
attitudes (e.g., commitment, identification; cf. Ng & Feldman, 2010) are further determinants of
job performance that are potentially affected by age differences. Indeed, workers rarely work at
their maximum strength, and lacking skills can often be compensated by high work motivation
and organizational commitment (Warr, 2001). Thus, age-related differences and changes in work
motivation and attitudes are additional building blocks for age-inclusive HRM.
Systematic research on age differences in work motivation is surprisingly new. While
earlier studies on work motivation often considered worker age as one of the conventional
control variables, only few studies primarily focused on age effects on work motivation so far
(Rhodes, 1983; see Rudolph, Baltes, & Zabel, 2013, for a review). This situation has changed in
the last years, partly triggered by seminal work of Warr (2001) and Kanfer and Ackerman
(2004), so that today not only numerous primary studies exist but also meta-analyses (Kooij et
al., 2011; Ng & Feldman, 2010, 2012b). In general, empirical results do not confirm the
pessimistic perspective predicting a decline of work motivation over the years (Stamov-
Roßnagel & Hertel, 2010). If at all, work motivation seem to be rather positively correlated with
workers’ age (e.g., ρ = .11; Ng & Feldman, 2012). Meta-analyses on job attitudes related to work
motivation yield similar results. For instance, older as compared to younger workers report
higher job involvement (ρ = .25), higher interpersonal and organizational trust (ρs = .17 and .09),
higher affective commitment (ρ = .24), and higher loyalty and organizational identification (ρs =
.21 and .20; Ng & Feldman, 2010). Although these differences are not very large and subject to
various moderating conditions, the fact that they are observed across different samples and work
conditions underlines the robustness of these age differences. Moreover, the findings
theoretically correspond to lifespan theories as well as theories of organizational socialization
(e.g., Schneider, Goldstein, & Smith, 1995), predicting that time at work not only leads to higher
job expertise but also to more general strengths due to life-long learning and selection processes
during which individuals maximize their social and emotional well-being. As a consequence,
older workers seem to be more likely in jobs they enjoy, cooperate with colleagues they like, and
work in organizations they experience as supportive and comfortable (Ng & Feldman, 2010).
In addition to these age-related trends in average work motivation and job attitudes,
significant differences occur with respect to more specific domains of work motivation, as
reflected in work values, needs, and priorities, providing interesting opportunities to attract and
motivate workers of different ages. Empirical results are again mostly consistent with lifespan
theories. For instance, age correlated negatively with career development motivation as well as
with learning motivation, learning self-efficacy, and training motivation in a meta-analysis by Ng
and Feldman (2012; ρs = -.14, -.14, -.17, and -.05, respectively; see also Kooij et al., 2011),
suggesting that priorities shift from information-related towards emotion-related goals across age
(Carstensen, 2009).
In contrast, older workers appear to prioritize goals related to emotion regulation and
positive experiences at work, which is also in line with lifespan theories. For instance, age has
been found to be positively related to use of existing skills (ρ = .10; Kooij et al., 2011) and
intrinsic motivation (ρ = .21; Ng & Feldman, 2010). Moreover, one of the most robust age
difference relates to autonomy at work (ρ = .27; Kooij et al., 2011). Apart from providing
additional flexibility to handle potential age-related capacity declines, high autonomy at work
can also signal trust and recognition of achievements at work. Thus, autonomy at work is
sometimes part of the role expectations for older workers.
Another way to experience recognition and meaningfulness at work is by helping others
based on expertise and job experience. Interestingly, such generativity goals were neglected in
established work value taxonomies but can be important strengths of older workers (Krumm,
Grube, & Hertel, 2013a). Indeed, age has been shown to be positively related to prosocial
motives (ρ = .09, Kooij et al., 2011), and with a cluster of generativity values at work including
helping others and legacy (r = .08; Krumm et al., 2013a). Finally, age was slightly negatively
related to motivation based on compensation and benefits (ρ = -.10; Kooij et al., 2011).
The observed age differences in work values can provide interesting guidelines for HRM
interventions, such as age-differentiated task design or allocation (Zacher, Feldman, et al., 2014).
The relative fit between persons’ work values and corresponding task characteristics (“need-
supply fit”; Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 2005) has been shown to be positively
related to both work motivation and job satisfaction . Krumm et al. (2013a) demonstrated that
this effect is particularly strong for older workers for a broad range of work values, including
extrinsic growth values (e.g., career, monetary benefits), generativity values (e.g., helping,
legacy), emotion-related values (e.g., appreciation, interesting work), and context-related values
(e.g., health, security). Thus, older workers seem to be particularly sensitive to misfits between
their personal needs and the current job supplies, consistent with lifespan theories predicting
increasing importance of maintaining positive affect when remaining time becomes restricted
(Carstensen, 2006).
Recent research has also compared workers’ explicit motives (usually assessed with self-
report questionnaires) with their implicit motives, reflecting rather unconscious dispositional
preferences (assessed with projective or semi-projective tests) that are nevertheless important
additional drivers of human behavior (McClelland, Koestner, & Weinberger, 1989). Indeed,
incongruence between explicit and implicit motives (e.g., a person conceiving himself as a
hardliner at work but having a high affiliation motive) has been considered a hidden stressor due
to permanent motive conflicts. In this respect, Thielgen, Krumm, Rauschenbach, and Hertel
(2015) found higher congruency between implicit and explicit motives for older as compared to
younger workers, probably due to learning processes and adaptations of explicit motives to their
dispositional implicit motive profile. Moreover, the researchers expected and found that older
workers reacted more negatively to incongruence between implicit and explicit motives, which is
again in line with the general assumption of lifespan theories that maintaining positive affect is
more important for older than for younger people (Carstensen, 2006; Charles, 2010).
Summarizing the empirical results on age and work motivation, older workers seem to
have considerable strengths as compared to younger workers: Older workers seem to have higher
overall work motivation, particularly with respect to intrinsic motivation but also in terms of
commitment and job involvement. Moreover, older workers particularly value high autonomy at
work, positive work experiences (including meaningful work), opportunities to help others and
pass on own experiences, and work conditions that fit to their work values. Finally, older
workers seem to experience less intrapersonal motive conflicts than younger workers, reducing
the need for self-regulation (Thielgen, Krumm, Rauschenbach, & Hertel, 2015). Younger
workers, in contrast, seem to be particularly motivated by learning and career related goals. Of
course, these general trends are further qualified by moderators such as job type, gender,
personality, or cultural variables (Stamov-Roßnagel & Biemann, 2012). Moreover, curvilinear
effects are often still to be examined. Finally, cohort effects reflecting different historical
conditions have to be considered as alternative or additional explanations, for instance, of work
value differences (Twenge, Campbell, Hoffman, & Lance, 2010).
Self-Regulation and Socio-Emotional Skills
Related to work motivation, self-regulation and socio-emotional skills are another area
where substantial age differences occur. Both self-regulation and socio-emotional skills
increasingly gain importance in modern organizations, for instance, because service industries
are replacing production industries in many industrialized countries, and because the increasing
decentralization of work processes, for instance in de-located teams or virtual organizations,
requires high self-management skills of workers. In general, self-regulation and socio-emotional
skills have been shown to increase with age (Blanchard-Fields, 2007). For instance, older
persons process positive emotional information more deeply than negative emotional information
(Löckenhoff & Carstensen, 2007). Moreover, older persons are less affected by tense social
situations, more forgiving and loyal, and seem to consider a broader range of emotion-regulation
strategies, which together yield better self-regulation and better skills to manage social
relationships (e.g., Birditt, Fingerman, & Almeida, 2005; Johnson, Holdsworth, Hoel, & Zapf,
2013; Scheibe & Blanchard-Fields, 2009; see Scheibe & Zacher, 2013, for a review).
Theoretically, these skills of older persons are not only consistent with more general learning
processes and accumulation of experience across time, but should be additionally amplified by
motivational changes predicted by lifespan theories (Carstensen, 2006; Charles, 2010), assuming
that maintaining positive and nurturing social relationships is more important when remaining
time becomes limited.
Empirical examinations of age differences in self-regulation and socio-emotional skills at
work are still rare. Among the initial examples, Thielgen, Krumm, and Hertel (2015) found
higher self-regulation skills for older as compared to younger workers, which seem to buffer
negative effects of intrapersonal motive conflicts on work motivation. Moreover, in a
longitudinal study on stress coping strategies, worker age was positively related to active coping
strategies requiring high self-regulation skills, and negatively related to passive avoidance coping
particularly in jobs with low job control (see also Hertel et al., 2015; Johnson et al., 2013, for
evidence on more effective stress management of older workers). These initial findings are
promising and suggest that the general advantages of older persons in self-regulation and socio-
emotional skills can also be found in work settings. However, it should also be noted that higher
self-regulation skills of older workers cannot be taken for granted. For instance, the use of SOC
strategies (P. B. Baltes & Baltes, 1990) as another form of self-regulation was not correlated with
age in work settings (Weigl et al., 2013; Zacher & Frese, 2011). More research is certainly
desirable here.
Work Performance
Work performance is arguably one of the most important employee outcomes in
organizations and is defined as measurable behaviors under the employee’s control that
contribute to organizational goals (Campbell, McCloy, Oppler, & Sager, 1993). The pervasive
stereotype that older employees are poorer performers than younger employees appears to have
been refuted by four meta-analyses conducted over the past 30 years, which all found near zero
relationships between age and task performance (McEvoy & Cascio, 1989; Ng & Feldman,
2008; Sturman, 2003; Waldman & Avolio, 1986). In the most recent meta-analysis, Ng and
Feldman (2008) showed that age did not have meaningful relationships with supervisor-rated
task performance (ρ = .02), creativity (ρ = .01), and performance in training programs (ρ = -.04).
Type of performance measure (i.e., self- and supervisor ratings, objective measure) did not
moderate the age-task performance relationship, suggesting that age stereotypes did not play a
role (Ng & Feldman, 2008). Contradicting popular stereotypes, supervisors rated older as
compared to younger workers higher on task-directed organizational citizenship behavior (ρ =
.21). Moreover, older workers complied more with safety rules (ρ = .10), had fewer work-related
injuries (ρ = -.08), and showed less counterproductive work behaviors (ρ = -.09), workplace
aggression (ρ = -.08), substance use (ρ = -.07), tardiness (ρ = -.26), and voluntary absenteeism (ρ
= -.10) than younger employees. Important limitations of meta-analyses on age and work
performance to date are that they include mainly primary studies that sampled only very few
workers 50 years and over, thus, generalizations to older workers (including examination of
curvilinear patterns) have to be made with care (McDaniel et al., 2012).
The results of meta-analyses showing weak or close to zero relationships between age
and work performance do not preclude that age-related mechanisms impact on employees’
behavior at work. In fact, Ng and Feldman (2013b) argued that there is evidence suggesting that
the relationships between age and different forms of job performance are mediated by within-
person changes in cognitive functioning, personality characteristics, goal orientation, socio-
emotional experience, and health. Importantly, some of these mediators are likely to have
countervailing effects on work performance, leading to weak overall relationships; for instance,
age-related increase in conscientiousness may compensate for age-related decreases in fluid
intelligence. A number of recent studies have explored indirect effects of age on work
performance. For instance, Zacher, Heusner, Schmitz, Zwierzanska, and Frese (2010) showed
that the relationship between age and work performance was mediated by employees’
perceptions of future occupational opportunities. Kunze et al. (2013) investigated resistance to
change as a mediator in the association between age and self-reported goal accomplishment.
Contrary to stereotypes, they found that age was negatively related to resistance to change, and
had an indirect effect on goal accomplishment through resistance to change.
Besides task, citizenship, and counterproductive performance, the job performance
domain has been extended over the past decade to also include employees’ proactive, team,
adaptive, and innovative performance (Griffin, Neal, & Parker, 2007). Of these dimensions, the
relationship between age and innovative performance has received most attention to date. In a
meta-analysis, Ng and Feldman (2013c) found that age and job tenure were weakly positively
related to self-rated innovative performance and unrelated to more objective measures of
innovative performance. Thus, this research does not support the widespread stereotype that
older workers are less innovative than younger workers. A number of primary studies have
further explored the boundary conditions of the relationship between age and innovative
performance. Binnewies, Ohly, and Niessen (2008) found that age interacted with job control
and support for creativity from coworkers and supervisors in predicting innovative performance,
such that the relationship was positive when job control was high and negative when job control
and support for creativity were low. Ng and Feldman (2012a) reported a positive relationship
between age and innovative performance among employees experiencing low supervisor
undermining as well as among employees with both high supervisor undermining and a proactive
personality. In contrast, the age-innovative performance relationship was negative when
supervisor undermining was high and employees’ proactive personality was low.
Overall, the relationship between age and job performance continues to mesmerize
organizational researchers (Beier & Kanfer, 2013; McDaniel et al., 2012). An interesting
possibility for future research is to examine age-related changes in work performance across
longer periods of the working lifespan, and mediating mechanisms of these changes (Cleveland
& Lim, 2007). In addition, more research is needed on age differences and age-related changes in
performance dimensions that are becoming increasingly important in the changing workplace,
such as proactive, team (including informal mentoring activities), and adaptive performance
(Griffin et al., 2007). Finally, a possible avenue for future research is how action regulation
strategies moderate the age-performance relationship. For instance, initial research by Yeung and
Fung (2009) showed that the use of goal selection and compensatory strategies was more
strongly positively related to job performance among older compared to younger employees.
The greatest risks in terms of work performance appear to exist for older employees in
jobs that require fast information processing without compensation opportunities by accumulated
knowledge or job experience (McDaniel et al., 2012). In these cases, older workers might change
to different work roles (e.g., trainer or supervisor). The finding that older workers tend to be
better organizational citizens suggests that they are in a good position to represent their company
well to organizational newcomers and outsiders, for instance in mentoring roles and as
organizational representatives (Calo, 2005).
Occupational Well-Being
In addition to job performance, occupational well-being involves another group of
important outcome variables in work and organizational psychology. In the context of an aging
workforce, well-being indicators receive additional importance as they are crucial for various
management goals, such as retention of (older) workers, maintaining high work ability at older
ages, or maintaining high work motivation and commitment across time. Thus, we briefly review
age differences in job satisfaction and strain/stress experience as main well-being indicators.
Job satisfaction was among the very first outcome variables investigated in relation to
worker age (Birdi, Warr, & Oswald, 1995; Rhodes, 1983). The resulting patterns yielded
sometimes linear (age correlates positively with job satisfaction; e.g., Ng & Feldman, 2010) and
sometimes curvilinear patterns, such that middle-aged workers report lower job satisfaction than
older and younger workers (Clark et al., 1996; Hochwarter, Ferris, Perrewe, Witt, & Kiewitz,
2001; Zacher, Jimmieson, et al., 2014). However, in nearly all studies (also across countries),
older workers consistently report higher satisfaction as compared to middle-aged workers. The
reason for this consistently higher job satisfaction of older workers is multifactorial, including
objective conditions such as (on average) higher pay, higher status, and more autonomy due to
seniority principles (at least for male workers), but also subjective processes such as lower
aspirations and emotion-regulation in light of a restricted remaining time at work. Moreover,
motivational processes described above (e.g., better person-environment fit and a higher
congruency between implicit and explicit motives for older persons) further contribute to a
higher job satisfaction of older workers. On the other hand, older as compared to younger
workers’ react more strongly to unfairness at work (Tenhiälä et al., 2013) and to breaches of
psychological contracts (P. M. Bal, De Lange, Jansen, & Van Der Velde, 2008). Again, limited
remaining time at work might explain this higher sensitivity of older workers’ job satisfaction to
the “here and now” at work.
In terms of age differences in the judgment of job satisfaction, recent research has
revealed that the correlation between attitudinal measures of job satisfaction (e.g., “All in all,
how satisfied are you with your current job?”) and experience-based measures “in situ” (based
on experience sampling, reconstruction, or diary methods; Rauschenbach & Hertel, 2011)
correspond more strongly for older than for younger workers (Hertel, Thielgen, et al., 2013).
This result suggests that older workers do not simply retrieve pre-prepared job satisfaction
ratings from their memory (which might be predicted by a more pessimistic perception of older
persons; e.g., Schwarz & Knäuper, 1999) but conduct their overall satisfaction judgment in light
of their current experiences at work. Younger workers, in turn, seem to consider additional
aspects (e.g., future opportunities) in their overall job satisfaction ratings, leading to a lower
correlation between general attitudinal ratings and experience-based judgments.
The relation between age and occupational strain has become the focus of empirical
research much more recently. While stereotypic beliefs often suggest that age is negatively
related to stress resistance due to (assumed) higher vulnerability of older persons, theoretical
predictions consider multiple processes that partly compensate each other (Rauschenbach et al.,
2013). While decreasing physical and/or cognitive capacities might indeed lead to higher
vulnerability of older workers (Charles, 2010), increasing socio-emotional skills and self-
regulation skills should at least partly compensate these processes and reduce strain at work
which, in turn, might facilitate more active coping strategies that further reduce strain (see Hertel
et al., 2015, for initial longitudinal evidence for such resource gain spirals). Moreover, context
conditions change over the lifespan, often placing particularly high demands on middle-aged
workers due to a sandwich position between different role expectations from occupational and
private life, and due to particularly high responsibilities in this life stage (Heckhausen et al.,
2010; Rauschenbach & Hertel, 2011; Zacher, Jimmieson, et al., 2014). Older workers, in
contrast, often have less stressful jobs in more strategic positions with higher autonomy enabling
more efficient stress coping strategies. Moreover, work-family conflicts tend to be higher for
middle-aged workers, who often have small children and/or family care duties (Huffman,
Culbertson, Henning, & Goh, 2013), whereas older workers may be more independent and thus
more open to flexible work arrangements, including traveling and longer working times.
As a consequence of these different and partly countervailing processes, the overall
correlation between age and strain might be rather low. Indeed, recent meta-analyses found no
overall correlation (neither linear nor curvilinear) between age and strain, neither for proximal
strain indicators such as irritation (Rauschenbach et al., 2013) nor for more distal indicators such
as burnout (Ng & Feldman, 2010). For emotional exhaustion as one facet of the burnout
construct (Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter, 2001), meta-analytic data even revealed a (slight)
negative correlation with age (ρ = -.09; Ng & Feldman, 2013a). Thus, empirical evidence again
speaks against an overall pessimistic perception of older workers in terms of stress resilience (Ng
& Feldman, 2012b). Instead, more differentiated research is desirable that considers potential
moderating conditions. For instance, strain does slightly increase with age in jobs with high
physical demands (e.g., production or construction work), and shows a reversed U-shaped
relation with age in social jobs (e.g., nurses or teachers), with middle-aged workers reporting the
highest level of strain (Rauschenbach et al., 2013). Further research is needed on different job
types but also on gender, education level, and other potential moderator variables.
Future empirical research might not only focus on a few selected components but rather
try to cover the complete stress process, considering different age-related processes
simultaneously (Zacher, Feldman, et al., 2014). More research is needed on potential mediating
mechanisms and moderators of these age differences in order to enable more focused
interventions. For instance, a recent study by Zacher, Jimmieson, et al. (2014) found that lower
job satisfaction and higher emotional exhaustion of middle-aged employees in the construction
industry as compared to both younger and older workers was mediated by perceived time
pressure and coworker support (but not work-family conflict in this study with predominantly
male participants). Of course, it may be possible that these findings are at least partly affected by
cohort effects or earlier dropouts of highly stressed workers (“healthy worker effect”). While
these questions require future research with longitudinal and cohort-sequential designs, a recent
study of general well-being showed that U-shaped patterns with age remain stable even when
cohort effects are considered (Blanchflower & Oswald, 2008).
Summarizing the empirical findings with respect to age and well-being at work, results
speak against popular age stereotypes and for a higher probability of older workers to experience
high well-being at work as compared to middle-aged workers. Remarkably, these differences are
not only due to less stressful jobs among older workers (Rauschenbach & Hertel, 2011), but also
seem to be a consequence of better self-regulation and more active coping strategies (Hertel et
al., 2015; Johnson et al., 2013). In consequence, age-inclusive management of well-being should
particularly address middle-aged workers, trying to reduce their burdens due to multiple role
expectations, and to provide additional resources such as support and more flexible working
conditions.
Practical Implications
In this section, we outline suggestions for evidence-based HRM strategies to address
demographic changes, in order to profit from evolving opportunities and prevent potential risks.
In addition to strategies at the level of organization management, we also discuss strategies that
can be used by individual workers, and broader societal decision processes (see Table 3).
Age-Inclusive HRM in Organizations

To motivate and retain workers from different age groups, and to maintain or increase
their work ability with age, organizations might want to focus on employees’ age-related
strengths and potentials, assist them in compensating for challenges, and avoid age
discrimination during all phases of the employment process. In the following, we discuss
possible interventions during (1) personnel attraction and selection, (2) work (re-)design, (3)
implementation of personnel development practices such as training and career development, and
health and performance management, (4) establishment and maintenance of positive
organizational cultures and climates, and (5) the retirement transition.
First, non-discriminatory selection procedures are key aspects of an age-inclusive HRM
(Böhm, Schröder, & Kunze, 2013; Naegele & Walker, 2011). Lievens, Van Hoye, and Zacher
(2012) summarized steps organizations might take to attract and recruit an age-diverse
workforce. For instance, organizations can conduct thorough work analyses to understand the
specific demands on workers, and which age-differentiated abilities are necessary to meet these
demands now and in the upcoming years (cf. Sanchez & Levine, 2012). Moreover, work
analyses can help organizations understand how they can meet the needs and preferences of
employees from different age groups. Organizations also need to choose recruitment messages
(e.g., which strengths of older workers are valued in this company) and recruitment sources (e.g.,
specialized online portals) that are consistent with the preferences and search behaviors of job
seekers from different age groups. In addition, it is recommended that organizations ensure
unbiased selection procedures that, for instance, do not only take the quantity but also the quality
of employment experiences into account, and that base hiring decisions on knowledge, skills, and
abilities rather than on age (Naegele & Walker, 2011). Once employees are on the job,
organizational performance measurement and reward systems should be non-age discriminatory;

this involves increasing the awareness of supervisors for age-related changes, younger and older
workers’ strengths and weaknesses, and implementing formal procedures to reduce the influence
of age bias (e.g., objective performance indicators). Initial tests of interventions showed that
training effectively reduced age stereotypes and team conflicts (Wegge et al., 2012).
Second, organizations can design and re-design jobs and broader work roles to motivate,
retain, and manage the performance of employees from different age groups (Griffiths, 1999).
This could involve, for instance, the implementation of support systems (e.g., robotics or
computer systems) that compensate for age-related declines in physical strength or working
memory. With regard to motivational work characteristics, research showed that younger
employees benefit more from high task variety and feedback, whereas older employees prefer
autonomous work that allows them to demonstrate and pass on their knowledge and skills
(Truxillo et al., 2012; Zaniboni, Truxillo, & Fraccaroli, 2013). Research at the team level further
suggests that work design and leadership are also important in the context of age-heterogeneous
teams. Specifically, age diverse teams show higher performance when working on complex
tasks, whereas they develop more physical health problem when working on routine tasks
(Wegge, Roth, Neubach, Schmidt, & Kanfer, 2008). Transformational leadership has been
shown to buffer potential negative effects of age diversity on team performance (Kearney &
Gebert, 2009), whereas negative stereotypes about older employees can intensify the negative
effects of age diversity on younger and older employees’ health (Liebermann, Wegge,
Jungmann, & Schmidt, 2013). It has further been recommend that companies introduce flexible
working time arrangements, to avoid demotivation and early exit from the workforce (Naegele &
Walker, 2011). These arrangements include paid and unpaid leaves for continuing education and
family caregiving responsibilities, as well as the adjustment of shift schedules, reduction of
working hours, job sharing, and relief from overtime.
Third, research suggests that younger and older workers differ in their reactions to
various HRM practices (Boehm & Dwertmann, 2015). Consistent with theory and findings on
age differences in work motivation, Kooij, Jansen, Dikkers, and De Lange (2010) found that the
relationships between perceived “maintenance HRM practices” (i.e., practices that help maintain
performance and well-being, such as job security, health and performance management, and
work-life policies) and job attitudes are stronger among older workers, whereas the relationships
between perceived “development HRM practices” (i.e., practices that further enhance
functioning, such as training and development, promotion and career development) and job
attitudes are stronger among younger workers. This research may suggest that, if the goal is to
enhance job attitudes such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment, companies should
apply maintenance HRM practices to older employees and development HRM practices to
younger employees. However, to fully tap the potentials of both younger and older workers,
companies should adopt differentiated maintenance and development practices for both younger
and older workers. For instance, research showed that younger employees react more positively
to performance feedback that is highly informative, whereas older employees react more
positively to feedback that is favorable and considerate (Wang et al., 2015). Moreover,
companies should ensure that they offer employees, regardless of their age, equal opportunities
for continuous (“life-long”) learning, training, and development, as well as for promotions,
transferals, and career progression (Naegele & Walker, 2011). Possibilities for career
development at higher ages include not only hierarchical career moves, but also horizontal
moves (e.g., into mentoring and organizational ambassador roles), project work assignments, and
downshifting.
Another maintenance HRM strategy that appears to be important to employees from
different age groups is the management of physical, mental, and social health (Böhm et al., 2013;
Naegele & Walker, 2011). Indeed, research shows that particularly employees in mid-career may
benefit from workplace interventions targeting mental health and well-being, such as decreasing
time pressure and increasing coworker support (Zacher, Jimmieson, et al., 2014). Generally,
holistic approaches that foster employees’ health and work ability are more beneficial than single
intervention (Ilmarinen, 2009). Possibilities for health initiatives include voluntary preventive
health checks, exercise opportunities, and improvement of ergonomic working conditions to
prevent accidents, injuries, and chronic diseases (Böhm et al., 2013). Notably, these initiatives do
not only benefit older workers, but also – and perhaps even more – their younger counterparts,
helping them to stay healthy and maintain work motivation for a longer work life.
Fourth, companies should ensure that negative age stereotypes are not engrained in their
organizational culture and climate (Staudinger, 2015). Organizational culture refers to the shared
and deeply-rooted values, norms, and beliefs within a company, whereas organizational climate
involves employees’ shared perceptions of more concrete organizational policies, practices, and
procedures; both constructs have been shown to impact employee attitudes and behaviors as well
as firm performance (Schneider, Ehrhart, & Macey, 2013). Research on age cultures suggests
that organizations differ in the extent to which the groups of younger and older employees are
generally perceived favorably, and that these differences are influenced by attitudes of top
management toward different age groups (Staudinger, 2015; Zacher & Gielnik, 2014). As
organizational age cultures are likely to have trickle-down effects on individual supervisor and
employee age stereotypes, attitudes, and work outcomes, it is important that top managers are
“age- and aging-sensitive” and their actions are not biased by age stereotypes. Research on age-
inclusive leadership is in its infancy, but the evidence so far suggests that supervisor
encouragement and recognition can help maintain and increase older employees’ work
performance and occupational well-being (Ilmarinen, 2009; Wegge et al., 2012; Zacher, Clark,
Anderson, & Ayoko, 2015). Research on the organizational level further showed that companies’
age discrimination and age diversity climates can negatively impact on firm and team
performance, and on employee retention via employees’ affective commitment and social
exchange perceptions (Böhm, Kunze, & Bruch, 2014; Kunze, Böhm, & Bruch, 2011). Overall,
research on age culture and climate suggests that organizations need to ensure that shared values
and beliefs, as well as policies, practices, and procedures are not age discriminatory but
recognize the strengths and potentials of employees from different age groups (see Posthuma &
Guerrero, 2013, for specific strategies also considering different cultural contexts).
Finally, organizations might want to support a smooth transition of older employees to
retirement (cf. Wang & Shi, 2014). This may include helping employees prepare for retirement
(e.g., through workshops and counseling facilities) and offering opportunities for keeping in
touch after retirement (e.g., as senior advisors or relief staff). Moreover, companies could offer a
choice of retirement models to match different needs (e.g., partial, phased, trial, and bridge
employment; Beehr & Bennett, 2015). Further important elements for the organization are a
constant monitoring of the demographic profile, and a structured and proactive knowledge
transfer to ensure that needed expertise remains in the company (Leibold & Voelpel, 2006).
Altogether, the outlined interventions at different phases in the HRM process illustrate
that much can be done by organizations to support an aging and age-diverse workforce. Notably,
most if not all of these changes benefit at least indirectly younger and middle-aged workers as
well, for instance, by increasing flexibility and adaptability at work as well as long-term support
of good health and high motivation. While reliable tests of economic benefits of an age-inclusive
management are still lacking, the advantages for humane work conditions and associated benefits
for attracting and retaining skilled workers should be obvious. Moreover, while developing
trainings of age-inclusive management might be easier for large organizations due to a better
ratio of investments to number of affected workers, screening and development of organizational
culture and age-climate might be easier for small and mid-size companies involving fewer
people.
Individuals
In addition to the responsibilities of organizations, the empirical findings described
suggest also various opportunities for the individual worker. In general, the perspective of a
longer work span highlights the individual’s responsibilities to maintain health and work ability.
For instance, participation in and planning of life-long learning activities becomes more
important when workers face a longer working life with more job changes in a career (Biemann
et al., 2012). In addition, the empirical findings suggest that maintenance of cognitive abilities
with increased age (including fluid intelligence) might be at least to some degree influenced by
individuals themselves, for instance, by changing daily tasks and seeking new challenges. Of
course, a realistic estimation of the potential effect size is still pending, but workers should
realize that cognitive capabilities, for instance, for learning new work techniques, are not
dramatically decreased for older workers.
In addition to maintaining task-related skills, pro-active and/or preventive health
management becomes an increasingly important task for workers, including regular physical
exercise activities, a balanced diet, and non-excessive alcohol use. While such activities can be
supported by the employer, the responsibilities of the workers themselves are increasing given a
growing general trend towards time-restricted job contracts (Eby, Butts, & Lockwood, 2003). In
general, a longer work-life requires considerable self-management skills for workers of all ages.
Such self-management skills can be addressed by specific training activities, for instance, using
the SOC principles of successful aging (P. B. Baltes & Baltes, 1990) as guidelines that have been
shown to increase performance and health at work (Bajor & Baltes, 2003; Weigl et al., 2013).
Moreover, some workers may benefit from engagement in job crafting activities and making
idiosyncratic deals with their organization to improve the fit between their personal needs and
their work situation (P. M. Bal, De Jong, Jansen, & Bakker, 2012; Kooij, Tims, & Kanfer, 2015).
Workers should be aware that the ongoing demographic changes increase the pressure on
organizations to support such self-managing activities of their workers, for instance by offering
financial support, development opportunities, or more flexibility at work.
Society
The suggested changes and interventions to address demographic changes are not limited
to individual workers or organizations. In fact, these suggestions have to be considered in their
societal context, not only because this context can determine what is doable (e.g., by formal
legislation), but also because society is directly affected by how the emerging challenges are
solved. For instance, distributional justice of work and related resources is a main factor for
social peace in a community. As the growing numbers of retirees depend on a shrinking work
population in many countries, population aging challenges economic security and retirement
plans. Over the last years, many governments have reacted with initial campaigns, for instance,
increasing the official retirement age (e.g., from 65 to 67 in Germany), promoting healthy aging
and fighting age discrimination at work, or launching life-long learning programs.

However, more can be done to further support an aging and increasingly age-diverse
workforce. For instance, rigid legalization is often a main hindrance for more flexible shifts from
work to retirement at the end of a career. Governmental and legislative support for more flexible
work arrangements (e.g., bridge employment, postretirement activities; cf. Wang & Shultz,
2010) are certainly helpful to retain those workers with changing priorities (e.g., lower strain,
fewer work hours, more time for family or other non-work activities). At the same time, careful
measures are needed to prevent that flexible work arrangements are misused as a simple cost
reduction strategy. Moreover, laws against age discrimination such as the Age Discrimination in
Employment Act in the United States are important means and signals how minorities are treated
in a society, and are today established in many industrialized countries. However, many of these
laws have been implemented only recently and still have to be shown to effectively prevent age
discrimination both in hiring as well as in termination decisions (Hedge & Borman, 2012)
Given that changes in legislation require broad consensus, governments and other societal
forces (e.g., labor unions, employer associations, etc.) need to further support an open discussion
about the opportunities of an aging workforce in order to provide leeway for innovative solutions
and experiments, and to explore policy options for an extended working life (Phillipson, 2013).
In particular, the frequent execution of early retirement options in the past decades (introduced as
a mean to cope with structural unemployment in those days) have created the expectation that
early retirement is a vested right, and any changes to this prospect are sometimes being perceived
as a betrayal. These normative expectations are difficult to change. Scientific research plays an
important role in this respect, providing evidence-based and potential new perspectives on
developmental opportunities. Therefore, higher presence of work and organizational
psychologists in governmental and societal decision boards and committees is certainly

desirable. In general, long-term campaigns are more advisable than mere singular actions. One
main challenge of such campaigns is to avoid focusing on the interests of selected groups only
(e.g., older well-educated males) in order to avoid reactance from other parties involved.
Future Research Needs
Based on our review of the work and aging literature, we now offer a number of
recommendations for future research (see Table 4 for a summary). First, we encourage
researchers in this field to conceptualize and examine mediating mechanisms of assumed age
differences and effects, including mediators of age as a moderator (Wang et al., 2015), instead of
treating age as a causal variable. Moreover, it is important to examine increased variability (i.e.,
fanning out) in work outcomes with increasing age in addition to average age trends, and to
conceptualize moderating factors that may help explain this increased heterogeneity among older
workers (Zacher, 2015). Importantly, age-related mediators and moderators may not only be
person-related but also contextual factors. Second, researchers should consider alternatives to
cross-sectional designs, such as (short-term) longitudinal studies and diary studies, as well as
training interventions both at the level of individual skills (Toril, Reales, & Ballesteros, 2014)
and at the level of HRM interventions (e.g., age-differentiated leadership training; Ries et al.,
2013). To better understand the role of age at work, it is important to consider insights from
studies using multiple different methodological approaches (cf. Hertzog et al., 2009).
Third, to preserve statistical power, it is important to treat age as a continuous variable
instead of using arbitrary cut-offs and groups for younger, middle-aged, and older workers.
Similarly, it is desirable that workers of different ages are equally represented in studies;
unfortunately, previous studies and meta-analyses have largely neglected actual older workers.
At least, sampling limitations and proportions of workers in different age groups should be
acknowledged. Researchers should also routinely examine curvilinear age effects (even if not
hypothesized), and report their findings. Fourth, other time-related constructs such as job and
organizational tenure should be considered as control variables to rule out alternative
explanations of age effects. Fifth, we encourage researchers to collect data from multiple
sources, including subjective and objective work outcomes. Last but not least, we strongly
recommend studying specific subgroups of older workers (cf. Marcus & Fritzsche, 2015),
especially those that are less privileged (e.g., women, less educated workers, unemployed) and
might show significantly different age trajectories. This is not only important for theory
development, but also for more efficient strategies to support these groups across the whole
work-life.
Conclusion
In this chapter we discussed the implications of demographic change and workforce aging
for individual employees, human resource management, organizations, and societies. We
reviewed common stereotypes of older workers and their potential effects on age discrimination
in the workplace and we attempted to correct existing misconceptions by comparing stereotypes
with empirical evidence. We outlined several currently important theoretical frameworks and
methodological consideration in the rapidly growing field of work and aging. In our review of
research on age differences and age-related changes in cognitive, physical, and self-regulatory
capabilities, as well as work motivation and work outcomes, we focused particularly on how the
effects of older workers’ strengths and potentials can be maximized, for instance through
workplace interventions. Based on the empirical evidence, practitioners can implement age-
inclusive HRM practices, and researchers can design more sophisticated studies to move
research on work and aging forward.

References
Ackerman, P. L. (1996). A theory of adult intellectual development: Process, personality,
interest, and knowledge. Intelligence, 22(2), 227-257. doi: 10.1016/S0160-
2896(96)90016-1
Alley, D., & Crimmins, E. (2007). The demography of aging and work. In K. S. Shultz & G. A.
Adams (Eds.), Aging and work in the 21st century (pp. 7-23). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Ashbaugh, D. L., & Fay, C. H. (1987). The threshold for aging in the workplace. Research on
Aging, 9(3), 417-427. doi: 10.1177/0164027587093005
Au, J., Sheehan, E., Tsai, N., Duncan, G. J., Buschkuehl, M., & Jaeggi, S. M. (2014). Improving
fluid intelligence with training on working memory: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic
Bulletin & Review. doi: 10.3758/s13423-014-0699-x
Baird, B. M., Pitzer, L., Russell, A., & Bergeman, C. S. (2012). Studying the aging worker:
Research designs and methodologies. In J. W. Hedge & W. C. Borman (Eds.), The
Oxford Handbook of Work and Aging (pp. 151-168). New York: Oxford University
Press.
Bajor, J. K., & Baltes, B. B. (2003). The relationship between selection optimization with
compensation, conscientiousness, motivation, and performance. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 63, 347-367. doi: 10.1016/S0001-8791(02)00035-0
Bal, A. C., Reiss, A. E. B., Rudolph, C. W., & Baltes, B. B. (2011). Examining positive and
negative perceptions of older workers: A meta-analysis. The Journals of Gerontology
Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 66(6), 687-698. doi:
10.1093/geronb/gbr056
Bal, P. M., De Jong, S. B., Jansen, P. G. W., & Bakker, A. B. (2012). Motivating employees to
work beyond retirement: A multi-level study of the role of I-deals and unit climate.
Journal of Management Studies, 49(2), 306-331. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2011.01026.x
Bal, P. M., De Lange, A. H., Jansen, P. G. W., & Van Der Velde, M. E. G. (2008). Psychological
contract breach and job attitudes: A meta-analysis of age as a moderator. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 72(1), 143-158. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2007.10.005
Bal, P. M., de Lange, A. H., Zacher, H., & van der Heijden, B. I. J. M. (2013). A lifespan
perspective on psychological contracts and their relations with organizational
commitment. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22(3), 279-
292. doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2012.741595
Bal, P. M., Kooij, D. T. A. M., & Rousseau, D. (Eds.). (2015). Aging workers and the employee-
employer relationship. New York: Springer.
Baltes, B. B., & Finkelstein, L. M. (2011). Contemporary empirical advancements in the study of
aging in the workplace. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(2), 151-154. doi:
10.1002/job.727
Baltes, B. B., & Heydens-Gahir, H. A. (2003). Reduction of work-family conflict through the use
of selection, optimization, and compensation behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology,
88(6), 1005-1018. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.6.1005
Baltes, B. B., Rudolph, C. W., & Bal, A. C. (2012). A review of aging theories and modern work
perspectives. In J. W. Hedge & W. C. Borman (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Work and
Aging (pp. 117-136). New York: Oxford University Press.

Baltes, P. B. (1987). Theoretical propositions of life-span developmental psychology: On the
dynamics between growth and decline. Developmental Psychology, 23(5), 611-626. doi:
10.1037/0012-1649.23.5.611
Baltes, P. B., & Baltes, M. M. (1990). Psychological perspectives on successful aging: The
model of selective optimization with compensation. In P. B. Baltes & M. M. Baltes
(Eds.), Successful aging: Perspectives from the behavioral sciences (pp. 1-34). New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Baltes, P. B., & Nesselroade, J. R. (1979). History and rationale of longitudinal research. In J. R.
Nesselroade & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), Longitudinal research in the study of behavior and
development (pp. 1-39). New York: Academic Press.
Barnes-Farrell, J. L., Rumery, S. M., & Swody, C. A. (2002). How do concepts of age relate to
work and off-the-job stresses and strains? A field study of health care workers in five
nations. Experimental Aging Research, 28(1), 87-98. doi: 10.1080/036107302753365577
Beal, D. J. (2012). Industrial/organizational psychology. In M. R. Mehl & T. S. Conner (Eds.),
Handbook of research methods for studying daily life (pp. 601-619). New York: Guilford
Press.
Beehr, T. A., & Bennett, M. M. (2015). Working after retirement: Features of bridge
employment and research directions. Work, Aging and Retirement, 1(1), 112-128. doi:
10.1093/workar/wau007
Beier, M. E., & Kanfer, R. (2013). Work performance and the older worker. In J. Field, R. J.
Burke & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of aging, work and society (pp. 97-
118). London: Sage.

Bengtson, V. L., Gans, D., Putney, N. M., & Silverstein, M. (2009). Theories about age and
aging. In M. Silverstein, V. L. Bengtson, N. M. Putney & D. Gans (Eds.), Handbook of
theories of aging (pp. 3-23). New York: Springer.
Bengtson, V. L., Putney, N. M., & Johnson, M. L. (2005). The problem of theory in gerontology
today. In M. L. Johnson (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of age and ageing (pp. 3-21).
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Biemann, T., Zacher, H., & Feldman, D. C. (2012). Career patterns: A twenty-year panel study.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 81(2), 159-170. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2012.06.003
Binnewies, C., Ohly, S., & Niessen, C. (2008). Age and creativity at work: The interplay
between job resources, age and idea creativity. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(4),
438-457. doi: 10.1108/02683940810869042
Birdi, K., Warr, P. B., & Oswald, A. (1995). Age differences in three components of employee
well-being. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 44(4), 345-373. doi:
10.1111/j.1464-0597.1995.tb01085.x
Birditt, K. S., Fingerman, K. L., & Almeida, D. M. (2005). Age differences in exposure and
reactions to interpersonal tensions: A daily diary study. Psychology and Aging, 20(2),
330-340. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.20.2.330
Blanchard-Fields, F. (2007). Everyday problem solving and emotion: An adult developmental
perspective. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(1), 26-31. doi:
10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00469.x
Blanchflower, D. G., & Oswald, A. J. (2008). Is well-being U-shaped over the life cycle? Social
Science & Medicine, 66(8), 1733-1749. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.01.030

Bloom, D. E. (2011). 7 billion and counting. Science, 333(6042), 562-569. doi:
10.1126/science.1209290
Boehm, S. A., & Dwertmann, D. J. G. (2015). Forging a single-edged sword: Facilitating
positive age and disability diversity effects in the workplace through leadership, positive
climates, and HR practices. Work, Aging and Retirement, 1(1), 41-63. doi:
Böhm, S. A., Kunze, F., & Bruch, H. (2014). Spotlight on age-diversity climate: The impact of
age-inclusive HR practices on firm-level outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 67(3), 667-
704. doi: 10.1111/peps.12047
Böhm, S. A., Schröder, H. S., & Kunze, F. (2013). Comparative age management: Theoretical
perspective and practical implications The SAGE handbook on work, aging, and society
(pp. 211-237). Thousand Oakes, CA: Sage.
Bowen, C. E., Noack, C. M. G., & Staudinger, U. M. (2011). Aging in the work context. In K.
W. Schaie & S. L. Willis (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of aging (7th ed., pp. 263-
277). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press.
Brandtstädter, J., & Renner, G. (1990). Tenacious goal pursuit and flexible goal adjustment:
Explication and age-related analysis of assimilative and accomodative strategies of
coping. Psychology and Aging, 5(1), 58-67. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.5.1.58
Calo, T. J. (2005). The generativity track: A transitional approach to retirement. Public
Personnel Management, 34(4), 301-312. doi: 10.1177/009102600503400402
Campbell, J. P., McCloy, R. A., Oppler, S. H., & Sager, C. E. (1993). A theory of performance.
In N. Schmitt & W. C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 35-79).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Carstensen, L. L. (2006). The influence of a sense of time on human development. Science,
312(5782), 1913-1915. doi: 10.1126/science.1127488
Carstensen, L. L. (2009). A long bright future: An action plan for a lifetime of happiness, health,
and financial security. New York: Broadway Books.
Carstensen, L. L., Isaacowitz, D. M., & Charles, S. T. (1999). Taking time seriously: A theory of
socioemotional selectivity. American Psychologist, 54(3), 165-181. doi: 10.1037/0003-
066X.54.3.165
Cattell, R. B. (1943). The measurement of adult intelligence. Psychological Bulletin, 40(3), 153-
193. doi: 10.1037/h0059973
Chand, M., & Tung, R. L. (2014). The aging of the world's population and its effects on global
business. Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(4), 409-429. doi:
10.5465/amp.2012.0070
Charles, S. T. (2010). Strength and vulnerability integration: A model of emotional well-being
across adulthood. Psychological Bulletin, 136(6), 1068-1091. doi: 10.1037/a0021232
Charles, S. T., & Carstensen, L. L. (2010). Social and emotional aging. Annual Review of
Psychology, 61, 383-409. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100448
Clark, A., Oswald, A., & Warr, P. (1996). Is job satisfaction U-shaped in age? Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 69, 57-81. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-
8325.1996.tb00600.x
Cleveland, J. N., & Lim, A. S. (2007). Employee age and performance in organizations. In K. S.
Shultz & G. A. Adams (Eds.), Aging and work in the 21st century (pp. 109-137).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Cleveland, J. N., Shore, L. M., & Murphy, K. R. (1997). Person- and context-oriented perceptual
age measures: Additional evidence of distinctiveness and usefulness. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 18(3), 239-251. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-
1379(199705)18:3<239::AID-JOB794>3.0.CO;2-A
Costa, G., & Sartori, S. (2007). Ageing, working hours and work ability. Ergonomics, 50(11),
1914-1930. doi: 10.1080/00140130701676054
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1994). Set like plaster? Evidence for the stability of adult
personality. In T. F. Heatherton & J. L. Weinberger (Eds.), Can personality change? (pp.
21-40). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Czaja, S. J., & Sharit, J. (2009). Aging and work: Issues and implications in a changing
landscape. Maryland, BA: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Deller, J., & Hertel, G. (2009). Demographic change in work organisations: Special issue of
Zeitschrift für Personalpsychologie [Journal of Personnel Psychology]. Zeitschrift für
Personalpsychologie, 8(2), 45-46. doi: 10.1026/1617-6391.8.2.45
DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2002). Higher-order factors of the Big Five
predict conformity: Are there neuroses of health? Personality and Individual Differences,
33(4), 533-552. doi: 10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00171-4
Eby, L. T., Butts, M., & Lockwood, A. (2003). Predictors of success in the era of the
boundaryless career. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(6), 689-708. doi:
10.1002/job.214
Erikson, E. H. (1950). Childhood and society. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.

Farr, J. L., & Ringseis, E. L. (2002). The older worker in organizational context: Beyond the
individual. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International Review of Industrial
and Organizational Psychology (pp. 31-75). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Feldman, D. C., & Vogel, R. M. (2009). The aging process and person-environment fit. In S. G.
Baugh & S. E. Sullivan (Eds.), Research in careers (pp. 1-25). Charlotte, NC:
Information Age Press.
Ferrer, E., & McArdle, J. J. (2010). Longitudinal modeling of developmental changes in
psychological research. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(3), 149-154.
doi: 10.1177/0963721410370300
Field, J., Burke, R. J., & Cooper, C. L. (Eds.). (2013). The SAGE Handbook of Aging, Work and
Society. London: Sage.
Finkelstein, L. M., Burke, M. J., & Raju, M. S. (1995). Age discrimination in simulated
employment contexts: An integrative analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80(6),
652-663. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.80.6.652
Finkelstein, L. M., King, E. B., & Voyles, E. C. (2015). Age metastereotyping and cross-age
workplace interactions: A meta view of age stereotypes at work. Work, Aging and
Retirement, 1(1), 26-40. doi: 10.1093/workar/wau002
Finkelstein, L. M., Ryan, K. M., & King, E. B. (2013). What do the young (old) people think of
me? Content and accuracy of age-based metastereotypes. European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology, 22(6), 633-657. doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2012.673279
Finkelstein, L. M., Truxillo, D., Fraccaroli, F., & Kanfer, R. (Eds.). (2015). Facing the
challenges of a multi-age workforce: A use-inspired approach: Taylor &
Francis/Routledge.
Fisher, G. G., Stachowski, A., Infurna, F., Faul, J. D., Grosch, J., & Tetrick, L. E. (2014). Mental
work demands, retirement, and longitudinal trajectories of cognitive decline. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 19(2), 231-242. doi: 10.1037/a0035724
Fiske, S. T. (2004). Intent and ordinary bias: Unintended thought and social motivation create
casual prejudice. Social Justice Research, 17(2), 117-127. doi:
10.1023/B:SORE.0000027405.94966.23
Gaillard, M., & Desmette, D. (2008). Intergroup predictors of older workers' attitudes towards
work and early exit. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 17(4),
450-481. doi: 10.1080/13594320801908564
Gerland, P., Raftery, A. E., Ševčíková, H., Li, N., Gu, D., Spoorenberg, T., . . . Wilmoth, J.
(2014). World population stabilization unlikely this century. Science, 346(6206), 234-
237. doi: 10.1126/science.1257469
Gerstorf, D., Ram, N., Hoppmann, C., Willis, S. L., & Schaie, K. W. (2011). Cohort differences
in cognitive aging and terminal decline in the Seattle Longitudinal Study. Developmental
Psychology, 47(4), 1026-1041. doi: 10.1037/a0023426
Greller, M. M., & Stroh, L. K. (2004). Making the most of “late-career” for employers and
workers themselves:: Becoming elders not relics. Organizational Dynamics, 33(2), 202-
214. doi: 10.1016/j.orgdyn.2004.01.007
Griffin, M. A., Neal, A., & Parker, S. K. (2007). A new model of work role performance:
Positive behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts. Academy of Management
Journal, 50, 327-347. doi: 10.5465/AMJ.2007.24634438
Griffiths, A. (1999). Work design and management: The older worker. Experimental Aging
Research, 25, 411-420.

Hansson, R. O., DeKoekkoek, P. D., Neece, W. M., & Patterson, D. W. (1997). Successful aging
at work: Annual review, 1992-1996: The older workers and transitions to retirement.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 51, 202-233. doi: 10.1006/jvbe.1997.1605
Heckhausen, J., & Schulz, R. (1995). A life-span theory of control. Psychological Review, 102,
284-304. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.102.2.284
Heckhausen, J., Wrosch, C., & Schulz, R. (2010). A motivational theory of life-span
development. Psychological Review, 117(1), 32-60. doi: 10.1037/a0017668
Hedge, J. W., & Borman, W. C. (2012). The Oxford handbook of work and aging. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Hertel, G., Rauschenbach, C., Thielgen, M., & Krumm, S. (2015). Are older workers more active
copers? Longitudinal effects of age-contingent coping on strain at work. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 36(4), 514-537. doi: 10.1002/job.1995
Hertel, G., Thielgen, M., Rauschenbach, C., Grube, A., Stamov-Roßnagel, C., & Krumm, S.
(2013). Age differences in motivation and stress at work. In C. Schlick, E. Frieling & J.
Wegge (Eds.), Age-differentiated work systems (pp. 119-147). Berlin, Germany:
Springer.
Hertel, G., Van der Heijden, B. I. J. M., de Lange, A. H., & Deller, J. (2013). Facilitating age
diversity in organizations–part I: Challenging popular misbeliefs. Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 28(7/8), 729-740. doi: 10.1108/JMP-07-2013-0233
Hertzog, C., Kramer, A. F., Wilson, R. S., & Lindenberger, U. (2009). Enrichment effects on
adult cognitive development: Can the functional capacity of older adults be preserved and
enhanced? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(1), 1-65. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-
6053.2009.01034.x
Hertzog, C., & Nesselroade, J. R. (2003). Assessing psychological change in adulthood: An
overview of methodological issues. Psychology and Aging, 18(4), 639-657. doi:
10.1037/0882-7974.18.4.639
Heybroek, L., Haynes, M., & Baxter, J. (2015). Life satisfaction and retirement in Australia: A
longitudinal approach. Work, Aging and Retirement, 1(2), 166-180. doi:
10.1093/workar/wav006
Hochwarter, W. A., Ferris, G. R., Perrewe, P. L., Witt, L. A., & Kiewitz, C. (2001). A note on
the nonlinearity of the age-job-satisfaction relationship. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 31(6), 1223-1237. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb02671.x
Hofer, S. M., & Piccinin, A. M. (2010). Toward an integrative science of life-span development
and aging. Journal of Grontology: Psychological Sciences, 65B(3), 269-278. doi:
10.1093/geronb/gbq017
Horn, J. L., & McArdle, J. J. (1992). A practical and theoretical guide to measurement invariance
in aging research. Experimental Aging Research, 18(3), 117-144. doi:
10.1080/03610739208253916
Huffman, A., Culbertson, S. S., Henning, J. B., & Goh, A. (2013). Work-family conflict across
the lifespan. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 28(7/8), 761-780. doi: 10.1108/JMP-07-
2013-0220
Ilmarinen, J. (2009). Aging and work: An international perspective. In S. J. Czaja & J. Sharit
(Eds.), Aging and work: Issues and implications in a changing landscape (pp. 51-73).
Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
James, K. S. (2011). India’s demographic change: Opportunities and challenges. Science,
333(6042), 576-580. doi: 10.1126/science.1207969

Jex, S. M., Wang, M., & Zarubin, A. (2007). Aging and occupational health. In K. S. Shultz &
G. A. Adams (Eds.), Aging and work in the 21st century (pp. 199-223). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Johnson, S. J., Holdsworth, L., Hoel, H., & Zapf, D. (2013). Customer stressors in service
organizations: The impact of age on stress management and burnout. European Journal
of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22(3), 318-330. doi:
10.1080/1359432X.2013.772581
Judge, T. A., & Hurst, C. (2008). How the rich (and happy) get richer (and happier):
Relationship of core self-evaluations to trajectories in attaining work success. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 93(4), 849-863. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.4.849
Kacmar, K. M., & Ferris, G. R. (1989). Theoretical and methodological considerations in the
age-job satisfaction relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(2), 201-207. doi:
10.1037/0021-9010.74.2.201
Kanfer, R., & Ackerman, P. L. (2004). Aging, adult development, and work motivation.
Academy of Management Review, 29(3), 440-458. doi: 10.5465/AMR.2004.13670969
Kanfer, R., Beier, M. E., & Ackerman, P. L. (2013). Goals and motivation related to work in
later adulthood: An organizing framework. European Journal of Work and
Kearney, E., & Gebert, D. (2009). Managing diversity and enhancing team outcomes: The
promise of transformational leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1), 77-89. doi:
10.1037/a0013077
Klein, R. M., Dilchert, S., Ones, D. S., & Dages, K. D. (2015). Cognitive predictors and age-
based adverse impact among business executives. Journal of Applied Psychology. doi:
10.1037/a0038991
Kooij, D. T. A. M., De Lange, A. H., Jansen, P. G. W., & Dikkers, J. S. E. (2008). Older
workers' motivation to continue to work: Five meanings of age. Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 23(4), 364-394. doi: 10.1108/02683940810869015
Kooij, D. T. A. M., De Lange, A. H., Jansen, P. G. W., Kanfer, R., & Dikkers, J. S. E. (2011).
Age and work-related motives: Results of a meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 32(2), 197-225. doi: 10.1002/job.665
Kooij, D. T. A. M., Jansen, P. G. W., Dikkers, J. S. E., & De Lange, A. H. (2010). The influence
of age on the associations between HR practices and both affective commitment and job
satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 1111-1136. doi:
10.1002/job.666
Kooij, D. T. A. M., Tims, M., & Kanfer, R. (2015). Successful aging at work: The role of job
crafting. In P. M. Bal, D. T. A. M. Kooij & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), Aging workers and
the employee-employer relationship (pp. 145-161). New York: Springer.
Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals'
fit at work: A meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, person-group, and
person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 281-342. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-
6570.2005.00672.x
Krumm, S., Grube, A., & Hertel, G. (2013a). The Munster Work Value Measure. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 28(5), 532-560. doi: 10.1108/JMP-07-2011-0023

Krumm, S., Grube, A., & Hertel, G. (2013b). No time for compromises: Age as a moderator of
the relation between needs–supply fit and job satisfaction. European Journal of Work and
Kulik, C. T., Ryan, S., Harper, S., & George, G. (2014). From the editors: Aging populations and
management. Academy of Management Journal, 57(4), 929-935. doi:
10.5465/amj.2014.4004
Kunze, F., Boehm, S., & Bruch, H. (2013). Age, resistance to change, and job performance.
Journal of Managerial Psychology, 28(7/8), 741-760. doi: 10.1108/JMP-06-2013-0194
Kunze, F., Böhm, S. A., & Bruch, H. (2011). Age diversity, age discrimination climate and
performance consequences: A cross organizational study. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 32(2), 264-290. doi: 10.1002/job.698
Leibold, M., & Voelpel, S. (2006). Managing the aging workforce: Challenges and solutions.
Erlangen, Germany: Publicis.
Levy, B. R. (2009). Stereotype embodiment: A psychosocial approach to aging. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 18(6), 332-336. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-
8721.2009.01662.x
Li, S.-C., & Schmiedek, F. (2002). Age is not necessarily aging: Another step towards
understanding the ‘clocks’ that time aging. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education, 48(1),
5-12. doi: 10.1159/000048917
Liebermann, S. C., Wegge, J., Jungmann, F., & Schmidt, K. H. (2013). Age diversity and
individual team member health: The moderating role of age and age stereotypes. Journal
of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 86(2), 184-202. doi:
10.1111/joop.12016
Lievens, F., Van Hoye, G., & Zacher, H. (2012). Recruiting/hiring of older workers. In J. W.
Hedge & W. C. Borman (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Work and Aging (pp. 380-391).
New York: Oxford University Press.
Lindenberger, U., Von Oertzen, T., Ghisletta, P., & Hertzog, C. (2011). Cross-sectional age
variance extraction: What's change got to do with it? Psychology and Aging, 26(1), 34-
47. doi: 10.1037/a0020525
Löckenhoff, C. E., & Carstensen, L. L. (2007). Aging, emotion, and health-related decision
strategies: Motivational manipulations can reduce age differences. Psychology and
Aging, 22(1), 134-146. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.22.1.134
MacCallum, R. C., Zhang, S., Preacher, K. J., & Rucker, D. D. (2002). On the practice of
dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological Methods, 7, 19-40. doi:
10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.19
Maertens, J. A., Putter, S. E., Chen, P. Y., Diehl, M., & Huang, Y.-H. (2012). Physical
capabilities and occupational health of older workers. In J. W. Hedge & W. C. Borman
(Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Work and Aging. New York: Oxford University Press.
Marcus, J., & Fritzsche, B. A. (2015). One size doesn’t fit all. Toward a theory on the
intersectional salience of ageism at work. Organizational Psychology Review, 5(2), 168-
188. doi: 10.1177/2041386614556015
Martin, B., & Xiang, N. (2015). The Australian retirement income system: Structure, effects and
future. Work, Aging and Retirement, 1(2), 133-143. doi: 10.1093/workar/wav003
Martus, P., Jakob, O., Rose, U., Seibt, R., & Freude, G. (2010). A comparative analysis of the
Work Ability Index. Occupational Medicine, 60(7), 517-524. doi:
10.1093/occmed/kqq093
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52(1), 397-422. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.397
Mayer, K. U. (2009). New directions in life course research. Annual review of sociology, 35,
423-424. doi: 10.1146/annurev.soc.34.040507.134619
McArdle, J. J. (2009). Latent variable modeling of differences and changes with longitudinal
data. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 577-605. doi:
10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163612
McClelland, D. C., Koestner, R., & Weinberger, J. (1989). How do self-attributed and implicit
motives differ? Psychological Review, 96(4), 690-702. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.96.4.690
McDaniel, M. A., Pesta, B. J., & Banks, G. C. (2012). Job performance and the aging worker. In
J. W. Hedge & W. C. Borman (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Work and Aging (pp. 280-
297). New York: Oxford University Press.
McEvoy, G. M., & Cascio, W. F. (1989). Cumulative evidence of the relationship between
employee age and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(1), 11-17. doi:
10.1037/0021-9010.74.1.11
McGonagle, A., Fisher, G. G., Barnes‐Farrell, J. L., & Grosch, J. (2015). Individual and work
factors related to perceived work ability and labor force outcomes. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 100(2), 376-398. doi: 10.1037/a0037974
Mischel, W. (1969). Continuity and change in personality. American Psychologist, 24(11), 1012-
1018. doi: 10.1037/h0028886
Morrow, D. G., Ridolfo, H. E., Menard, W. E., Sanborn, A., Stine-Morrow, E. A. L., Magnor,
C., . . . Bryant, D. (2003). Environmental support promotes expertise-based mitigation of

age differences on pilot communication tasks. Psychology and Aging, 18(2), 268-284.
doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.18.2.268
Müller, A., De Lange, A., Weigl, M., Van der Heijden, B., Ackermans, J., & Wilkenloh, J.
(2015). Task performance among employees above age 65: The role of cognitive
functioning and job demand-control. Work, Aging and Retirement, 1(3). doi:
10.1093/workar/wav001
Naegele, G., & Walker, A. (2011). Age management in organisations in the European Union. In
M. Malloch, B. N. O'Connor, K. Evans & L. Cairns (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of
workplace learning (pp. 251-267).
Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2008). The relationship of age to ten dimensions of job
performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 392-423. doi: 10.1037/0021-
9010.93.2.392
Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2010). The relationship of age with job attitudes: A meta-
analysis. Personnel Psychology, 63(3), 667-718. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01184.x
Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2012a). Age and innovation-related behavior: The joint
moderating effects of supervisor undermining and proactive personality. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 34(5), 583-606. doi: 10.1002/job.1802
Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2012b). Evaluating six common stereotypes about older
workers with meta-analytical data. Personnel Psychology, 65(4), 821-858. doi:
10.1111/peps.12003
Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2013a). Employee age and health. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 83(3), 336-345. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2013.06.004

Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2013b). How do within-person changes due to aging affect job
performance? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 83(3), 500-513. doi:
10.1016/j.jvb.2013.07.007
Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2013c). A meta-analysis of the relationships of age and tenure
with innovation-related behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational
Psychology. doi: 10.1111/joop.12031
Nunes, A., & Kramer, A. F. (2009). Experience-based mitigation of age-related performance
declines: Evidence from air traffic control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied,
15(1), 12-24. doi: 10.1037/a0014947
Park, D. C., & Reuter-Lorenz, P. (2009). The adaptive brain: Aging and neurocognitive
scaffolding. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 173-196. doi:
10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093656
Peng, X. (2011). China’s demographic history and future challenges. Science, 333(6042), 581-
587. doi: 10.1126/science.1209396
Perry, E. L., Dokko, G., & Golom, F. D. (2012). The aging worker and person–environment fit.
In J. W. Hedge & W. C. Borman (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Work and Aging (pp.
187-212). New York: Oxford University Press.
Perry, E. L., & Finkelstein, L. M. (1999). Toward a broader view of age discrimination in
employment-related decisions: A joint consideration of organizational factors and
cognitive processes. Human Resource Management Review, 9(1), 21-49. doi:
10.1016/S1053-4822(99)00010-8
Phillips, D. R., & Siu, O. (2012). Global aging and aging workers. In J. W. Hedge & W. C.
Borman (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Work and Aging (pp. 11-32). New York:
Piaget, J. (1947). Le Jugement et le raisonnement chez l'enfant Neuchatel, Switzerland:
Delachaux & Niestl.
Posthuma, R. A., & Campion, M. A. (2009). Age stereotypes in the workplace: Common
stereotypes, moderators, and future research directions. Journal of Management, 35(1),
158-188. doi: 10.1177/0149206308318617
Posthuma, R. A., & Guerrero, L. (2013). Age stereotypes in the workplace: Multidimensionality,
cross-cultural applications, and directions for future research. In J. Field, R. J. Burke &
C. L. Cooper (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of aging, work and society (pp. 250-265).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ram, N., & Gerstorf, D. (2009). Time-structured and net intraindividual variability: Tools for
examining the development of dynamic characteristics and processes. Psychology and
Aging, 24(4), 778-791. doi: 10.1037/a0017915
Ram, N., Gerstorf, D., Lindenberger, U., & Smith, J. (2011). Developmental change and
intraindividual variability: Relating cognitive aging to cognitive plasticity, cardiovascular
lability, and emotional diversity. Psychology and Aging, 26(2), 363-371. doi:
10.1037/a0021500
Rauschenbach, C., Goritz, A. S., & Hertel, G. (2012). Age stereotypes about emotional resilience
at work. Educational Gerontology, 38, 511-519. doi: 10.1080/03601277.2011.567187
Rauschenbach, C., & Hertel, G. (2011). Age differences in strain and emotional reactivity to
stressors in professional careers. Stress and Health, 27, e48-e60. doi: 10.1002/smi.1335
Rauschenbach, C., Krumm, S., Thielgen, M. M., & Hertel, G. (2013). Age and work-related
stress: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 28(7/8), 781-804.
doi: 10.1108/JMP-07-2013-0251
Rhodes, S. R. (1983). Age-related differences in work attitudes and behavior: A review and
conceptual analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 93(2), 328-367. doi: 10.1037/0033-
2909.93.2.328
Ries, B. C., Diestel, S., Shemla, M., Liebermann, S. C., Jungmann, F., Wegge, J., & Schmidt, K.
H. (2013). Age diversity and team effectiveness. In C. M. Schlick (Ed.), Age-
differentiated work systems (pp. 89-118). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
Roberts, B. W. (2009). Back to the future: Personality and Assessment and personality
development. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(2), 137-145. doi:
10.1016/j.jrp.2008.12.015
Roberts, B. W., & Mroczek, D. K. (2008). Personality trait change in adulthood. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 17(1), 31-35. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-
8721.2008.00543.x
Roberts, B. W., Walton, K. E., & Viechtbauer, W. (2006). Patterns of mean-level change in
personality traits across the life course: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies.
Psychological Bulletin, 132(1), 1-25. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.132.1.1
Roberts, B. W., & Wood, D. (2006). Personality development in the context of the Neo-
Socioanalytic Model of Personality. In D. K. Mroczek & T. D. Little (Eds.), Handbook of
personality development (pp. 11-39). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrance Erlbaum Associates.
Roberts, L. (2011). 9 Billion? Science, 333(6042), 540-543. doi: 10.1126/science.333.6042.540

Roe, R. A. (2008). Time in applied psychology: The study of "what happens" rather than "what
is". European Psychologist, 13(1), 37-52. doi: 10.1027/1016-9040.13.1.37
Rosen, B., & Jerdee, T. H. (1976). The influence on age stereotypes on managerial decisions.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 61(4), 428-432. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.61.4.428
Rudolph, C., Baltes, B. B., & Zabel, K. L. (2013). Age and work motives. In J. Field, R. J. Burke
& C. L. Cooper (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of aging, work and society (pp. 118-140).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Salthouse, T. A. (2006). Mental exercise and mental aging: Evaluating the validity of the “use it
or lose it” hypothesis. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 68–87. doi:
10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00005.x
Salthouse, T. A. (2012). Consequences of age-related cognitive declines. Annual Review of
Psychology, 63, 201-226. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100328
Salthouse, T. A. (2013). Within-cohort age-related differences in cognitive functioning.
Psychological science, 0956797612450893. Psychological Science, 24(2), 123-130. doi:
10.1177/0956797612450893
Salthouse, T. A. (2014). Why are there different age relations in cross-sectional and longitudinal
comparisons of cognitive functioning? Current Directions in Psychological Science,
23(4), 252-256. doi: 10.1177/0963721414535212
Salthouse, T. A. (2015). Implications of the Flynn effect for age–cognition relations.
Intelligence, 48(1), 51-57. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2014.10.007
Sanchez, J. I., & Levine, E. L. (2012). The rise and fall of job analysis and the future of work
analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 397-425. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-
120710-100401
Sánchez Palacios, C., Torres, T., & Blanca Mena, M. J. (2009). Negative aging stereotypes and
their relation with psychosocial variables in the elderly population. Archives of
Gerontology and Geriatrics, 48(3), 385-390. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2008.03.007
Schaie, K. W. (2013). Developmental influences on adult intelligence: The Seattle Longitudinal
Study (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Schalk, R., van Veldhoven, M., de Lange, A. H., De Witte, H., Kraus, K., Roßnagel, C., . . .
Zacher, H. (2010). Moving European research on work and ageing forward: Overview
and agenda. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 19(1), 76-101.
doi: 10.1080/13594320802674629
Scheibe, S., & Blanchard-Fields, F. (2009). Effects of regulating emotions on cognitive
performance: What is costly for young adults is not so costly for older adults. Psychology
and Aging, 24(1), 217-223. doi: 10.1037/a0013807
Scheibe, S., Stamov-Roßnagel, C., & Zacher, H. (2015). Links between emotional job demands
and occupational well-being: Age differences depend on type of demand. Work, Aging
and Retirement, 1(3). doi: 10.1093/workar/wav007
Scheibe, S., & Zacher, H. (2013). A lifespan perspective on emotion regulation, stress, and well-
being in the workplace. In P. L. Perrewé, J. Halbesleben & C. C. Rosen (Eds.), Research
in occupational stress and well-being (Vol. 11, pp. 167-197). Bingley, UK: Emerald.
Schmiedek, F., Lövdén, M., & Lindenberger, U. (2013). Keeping it steady: Older adults perform
more consistently on cognitive tasks than younger adults. Psychological Science, 24(9),
1747-1754. doi: 10.1177/0956797613479611
Schmitt, A., Zacher, H., & Frese, M. (2012). The buffering effect of selection, optimization, and
compensation strategy use on the relationship between problem solving demands and
occupational well-being: A daily diary study. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology, 17, 139-149. doi: 10.1037/a0027054
Schneider, B., Ehrhart, M. G., & Macey, W. H. (2013). Organizational climate and culture.
Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 361-388. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143809
Schneider, B., Goldstein, H. W., & Smith, D. B. (1995). The ASA framework: An update.
Personnel Psychology, 48(4), 747-773. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01780.x
Schooler, C., Mulatu, M. S., & Oates, G. (2004). Occupational self-direction, intellectual
functioning, and self-directed orientation in older workers: Findings and implications for
individuals and societies. American Journal of Sociology, 110(1), 161-197. doi:
10.1086/385430
Schwall, A. R. (2012). Defining age and using age-relevant constructs. In J. W. Hedge & W. C.
Borman (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Work and Aging (pp. 169-186). New York:
Shultz, K. S., & Adams, G. A. (2007a). Aging and work in the 21st century. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Shultz, K. S., & Adams, G. A. (2007b). In search of a unifying paradigm for understanding aging
and work in the 21st century. In K. S. Shultz & G. A. Adams (Eds.), Aging and work in
the 21st century (pp. 303-319). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Skirbekk, V., Stonawski, M., Bonsang, E., & Staudinger, U. M. (2013). The Flynn effect and
population aging. Intelligence, 41(3), 169-177. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2013.02.001
Sonnentag, S. (2012). Time in organizational research: Catching up on a long neglected topic in
order to improve theory. Organizational Psychology Review, 2(4), 361-368. doi:
10.1177/2041386612442079
Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2012). Development of Big Five domains and facets in adulthood:
Mean‐level age trends and broadly versus narrowly acting mechanisms. Journal of
Personality, 80(4), 881-914. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00752.x
Stamov-Roßnagel, C., & Biemann, T. (2012). Ageing and work motivation: A task-level
perspective. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 27(5), 459-478. doi:
10.1108/02683941211235382
Stamov-Roßnagel, C., & Hertel, G. (2010). Older workers' motivation: Against the myth of
general decline. Management Decision, 48(6), 894-906. doi:
10.1108/00251741011053451
Staudinger, U. M. (2015). Images of aging: Outside and inside perspectives. Annual Review of
Gerontology and Geriatrics, 35(1), 187-209. doi: 10.1891/0198-8794.35.187
Sturman, M. C. (2003). Searching for the inverted U-shaped relationship between time and
performance: Meta-analyses of the experience/performance, tenure/performance, and
age/performance relationships. Journal of Management, 29(5), 609-640. doi:
10.1016/S0149-2063(03)00028-X
Super, D. E. (1980). A life-span, life-space approach to career development. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 16(3), 282-298. doi: 10.1016/0001-8791(80)90056-1
Taylor, J. L., O'Hara, R., Mumenthaler, M. S., Rosen, A. C., & Yesavage, J. A. (2005).
Cognitive ability, expertise, and age differences in following air-traffic control
instructions. Psychology and Aging, 20(1), 117-133. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.20.1.117
Tenhiälä, A., Linna, A., von Bonsdorff, M., Pentti, J., Vahtera, J., Kivimäki, M., & Elovainio, M.
(2013). Organizational justice, sickness absence and employee age. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 28(7/8), 805-825. doi: 10.1108/JMP-07-2013-0246

Then, F. S., Luck, T., Luppa, M., Thinschmidt, M., Deckert, S., Nieuwenhuijsen, K., . . . Riedel-
Heller, S. G. (2014). Systematic review of the effect of the psychosocial working
environment on cognition and dementia. Occupational and Environmental Medicine,
71(5), 358-365. doi: 10.1136/oemed-2013-101760
Thielgen, M. M., Krumm, S., & Hertel, G. (2015). When being old pays off: Age mitigates
adverse effects of low implicit–explicit motive congruency on work motivation. Journal
of Career Assessment. doi: 10.1177/1069072714547613
Thielgen, M.M., Krumm, S., Rauschenbach, C., & Hertel, G. (2015). Older but wiser: Age
moderates congruency effects between implicit and explicit motives on job satisfaction.
Motivation and Emotion, 39(2), 182-200. doi: 10.1007/s11031-014-9448-8
Toril, P., Reales, J. M., & Ballesteros, S. (2014). Video game training enhances cognition of
older adults: A meta-analytic study. Psychology and Aging, 29(3), 706-716. doi:
10.1037/a0037507
Truxillo, D. M., Cadiz, D. M., & Hammer, L. B. (2015). Supporting the aging workforce: A
research review and recommendations for workplace intervention research. Annual
Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2, 351-381. doi:
10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111435
Truxillo, D. M., Cadiz, D. M., Rineer, J. R., Zaniboni, S., & Fraccaroli, F. (2012). A lifespan
perspective on job design: Fitting the job and the worker to promote job satisfaction,
engagement, and performance. Organizational Psychology Review, 2(4), 340-360. doi:
10.1177/2041386612454043
Truxillo, D. M., & Fraccaroli, F. (2013). Research themes on age and work: Introduction to the
special issue. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22(3), 249-252.
doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2013.786604
Tuomi, K., Ilmarinen, J., Martikainen, R., Aalto, L., & Klockars, M. (1997). Aging, work, life-
style and work ability among Finnish municipal workers in 1981–1992. Scandinavian
Journal of Work, Environment and Health, 23(Suppl 1), 58-65. doi:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40966692
Twenge, J. M., Campbell, S. M., Hoffman, B. J., & Lance, C. E. (2010). Generational
differences in work values: Leisure and extrinsic values increasing, social and intrinsic
values decreasing. Journal of Management, 36(5), 1117-1142. doi:
10.1177/0149206309352246
United Nations. (2007). World economic and social survey: Development in an ageing world.
New York: United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2014). The Age Discrimination in
Employment Act of 1967. Retrieved November 5, 2014, from
http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/adea.cfm
Van Vianen, A. E., Dalhoeven, B. A., & De Pater, I. E. (2011). Aging and training and
development willingness: Employee and supervisor mindsets. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 32(2), 226-247. doi: 10.1002/job.685
Vaupel, J. W., & Loichinger, E. (2006). Redistributing work in aging Europe. Science, 312,
1911-1913. doi: 10.1126/science.1127487

Verhaeghen, P., & Salthouse, T. A. (1997). Meta-analyses of age-cognition relations in
adulthood: Estimates of linear and nonlinear age effects and structural models.
Psychological Bulletin, 122(3), 231-249. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.122.3.231
Von Hippel, C., Kalokerinos, E. K., & Henry, J. D. (2012). Stereotype threat among older
employees: Relationships with job attitudes and turnover intentions. Psychology and
Aging, 28(1), 17-27. doi: 10.1037/a0029825
Waldman, D. A., & Avolio, B. J. (1986). A meta-analysis of age differences in job performance.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(1), 33-38. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.71.1.33
Wang, M. (2015). Inaugural editorial. Work, Aging and Retirement, 1(1), 1-3. doi:
Wang, M., Burlacu, G., Truxillo, D., James, K. S., & Yao, X. (2015). Age differences in
feedback reactions: The roles of employee feedback orientation on social awareness and
utility. Journal of Applied Psychology. doi: 10.1037/a0038334
Wang, M., & Shi, J. (2014). Psychological research on retirement. Annual Review of Psychology,
65, 1.1-1.25. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115131
Wang, M., & Shultz, K. S. (2010). Employee retirement: A review and recommendations for
future investigation. Journal of Management, 36(1), 172-206.
Warr, P. B. (1993). In what circumstances does job performance vary with age? European Work
and Organizational Psychologist, 3(3), 237-249. doi: 10.1080/09602009308408593
Warr, P. B. (2001). Age and work behaviour: Physical attributes, cognitive abilities, knowledge,
personality traits and motives. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International
Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Vol. 16, pp. 1-36). Chichester, UK:
Wiley.
Warren, D. A. (2015). Pathways to retirement in Australia: Evidence from the HILDA survey.
Work, Aging and Retirement, 1(2), 144-165. doi: 10.1093/workar/wau013
Wegge, J., Jungmann, F., Liebermann, S., Shemla, M., Ries, B. C., Diestel, S., & Schmidt, K. H.
(2012). What makes age diverse teams effective? Results from a six-year research
program. Work: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment and Rehabilitation, 41, 5145-5151.
doi: 10.3233/WOR-2012-0084-5145
Wegge, J., Roth, C., Neubach, B., Schmidt, K. H., & Kanfer, R. (2008). Age and gender
diversity as determinants of performance and health in a public organization: The role of
task complexity and group size. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(6), 1301-1313. doi:
10.1037/a0012680
Weigl, M., Müller, A., Hornung, S., Zacher, H., & Angerer, P. (2013). The moderating effects of
job control and selection, optimization, and compensation strategies on the age-work
ability relationship. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 607-628. doi:
10.1002/job.1810
Wiese, B. S., Freund, A. M., & Baltes, P. B. (2000). Selection, optimization, and compensation:
An action-related approach to work and partnership. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 57,
273-300. doi: 10.1006/jvbe.2000.1752
Yeung, D. Y., & Fung, H. H. (2009). Aging and work: How do SOC strategies contribute to job
performance across adulthood? Psychology and Aging, 24(4), 927-940. doi:
10.1037/a0017531
Zacher, H. (2013). Older job seekers' job search intensity: The interplay of proactive personality,
age, and occupational future time perspective. Ageing & Society, 33(7), 1139-1166. doi:
10.1017/S0144686X12000451
Zacher, H. (2015). Successful aging at work. Work, Aging and Retirement, 1(1), 4-25. doi:
Zacher, H., Clark, M., Anderson, E. C., & Ayoko, O. B. (2015). A lifespan perspective on
leadership. In P. M. Bal, D. T. A. M. Kooij & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), Aging workers and
the employee-employer relationship (pp. 87-104): Springer.
Zacher, H., Feldman, D. C., & Schulz, H. (2014). Age, occupational strain, and well-being: A
person-environment fit perspective. In P. L. Perrewé, J. Halbesleben & C. C. Rosen
(Eds.), Research in occupational stress and well-being (Vol. 12, pp. 83-111). Bingley,
UK: Emerald.
Zacher, H., & Frese, M. (2009). Remaining time and opportunities at work: Relationships
between age, work characteristics, and occupational future time perspective. Psychology
and Aging, 24(2), 487-493. doi: 10.1037/a0015425
Zacher, H., & Frese, M. (2011). Maintaining a focus on opportunities at work: The interplay
between age, job complexity, and the use of selection, optimization, and compensation
strategies. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32, 291-318. doi: 10.1002/job.683
Zacher, H., & Gielnik, M. (2014). Organizational age cultures: The interplay of chief executive
officers’ age and attitudes toward younger and older employees. International Small
Business Journal, 32(3), 327-349. doi: 10.1177/0266242612463025
Zacher, H., & Griffin, B. (2015). Work, aging, and retirement in Australia: Introduction to the
special issue. Work, Aging and Retirement, 1(2), 129-132. doi: 10.1093/workar/wau011
Zacher, H., Heusner, S., Schmitz, M., Zwierzanska, M. M., & Frese, M. (2010). Focus on
opportunities as a mediator of the relationships between age, job complexity, and work
performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76(3), 374-386. doi:
10.1016/j.jvb.2009.09.001
Zacher, H., Jimmieson, N. L., & Bordia, P. (2014). Time pressure and coworker support mediate
the curvilinear relationship between age and occupational well-being. Journal of
Zacher, H., Jimmieson, N. L., & Winter, G. (2012). Eldercare demands, mental health, and work
performance: The moderating role of satisfaction with eldercare tasks. Journal of
Zaniboni, S. (2015). The interaction between older workers’ personal resources and perceived
age discrimination affects the desired retirement age and the expected adjustment. Work,
Aging and Retirement, 1(3). doi: 10.1093/workar/wav010
Zaniboni, S., Truxillo, D. M., & Fraccaroli, F. (2013). Differential effects of task variety and
skill variety on burnout and turnover intentions for older and younger workers. European
Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22(3), 306-317. doi:
10.1080/1359432X.2013.782288
Table 1
Age Stereotypes at Work (e.g., Finkelstein et al., 1995; Gordon & Arvey, 2004; Posthuma &
Campion, 2009) and Related Empirical Evidence
Age Stereotypes Favoring Younger Workers
Productivity
 Older workers perform not as well as younger workers (not confirmed).
 Older workers are less motivated than younger workers (not confirmed).
 Older workers have lower work abilities than younger workers (only confirmed for physical
skills and fluid intelligence, and with high inter-individual variability).
 Older workers are less creative and innovative (not confirmed).
Learning, Development, and Return of Training Investments

 Older workers have lower learning motivation than younger workers (confirmed, but this may
be due to stereotype threat and self-fulfilling prophecies rather than aging per se).
 Older workers have lower learning abilities than younger workers (not confirmed).
 Older workers are more resistant to change and less flexible than younger workers (not
confirmed).
Health and Stress Resilience

 Older workers have lower health (only confirmed for some physical indicators).
 Older workers take more sick leaves than younger workers (only partly confirmed).
 Older workers are more vulnerable to stress at work (not confirmed).
Age Stereotypes Favoring Older Workers
Reliability
 Older workers are more dependable, careful, loyal, and trustworthy than younger workers
(confirmed).
 Older workers have more experience and are thus more stable and cool-headed than younger
workers (partly confirmed).
 Older workers are more committed to the job than younger workers (confirmed).
 Older workers are less likely to miss work (confirmed for voluntary absenteeism).
 Older workers are less likely to turnover quickly (confirmed).
Table 2
Empirically Established Age Differences in Work-Related Capabilities, Motivation, and Work
Outcomes
Work-Related Capabilities
 Lower physiological and physical abilities (e.g., sensory, muscle, cardiovascular, respiratory,
neurological, and immune system functions) among older workers, but also larger inter-
individual variation.
 Slightly higher values for blood pressure, cholesterol level, body mass index, and self-
reported insomnia among older workers.
 Higher fluid intelligence (abstract reasoning, selective attention, novel problem solving, and
rapid information processing) among younger workers, but also larger inter-individual
variation in fluid intelligence between older workers.
 Higher crystallized intelligence (experience-based and domain-specific knowledge,
vocabulary, and verbal comprehension) among older workers.
 Higher stability and less fluctuation of cognitive performance among older workers.
 Higher emotional and self-regulation skills among older workers.
 More active coping strategies among older workers.
 Slightly higher consciousness and agreeableness, and slightly lower neuroticism among older
workers.
Work Motivation
 Higher learning motivation among younger workers.
 Higher autonomy needs and pro-social values (generativity) among older workers.
 Higher sensitivity for person-environment fit for among workers.
 Higher congruency between explicit and implicit motives (i.e., lower motive conflicts) among
older workers.
 Lower resistance to change among older workers.
Work Performance and Occupational Well-being

 No age differences in core task performance.
 Higher contextual performance and organizational citizenship behavior among older workers.
 Higher job satisfaction among older workers.
 More positive job attitudes among older workers (e.g., loyalty, trust, commitment).
 Higher strain and exhaustion among middle-aged workers.
Table 3
Implications for Age-Inclusive Human Resource Management
Organizations
 Personnel attraction and selection: Conduct age-inclusive job analyses and implement non-
discriminatory selection procedures.
 Work (re-)design: Consider different age-related abilities and needs (particularly in team
contexts and as a leader) and implement relevant support systems.
 Personnel development: Ensure adequate training and career development opportunities, as
well as health and performance management for workers irrespective of their age.
 Positive organizational age culture and climate: Eliminate negative age stereotypes in shared
beliefs and values, and eliminate age discrimination in policies, practices, and procedures.
 Facilitating the retirement transition: Help older workers prepare for retirement, offer
different retirement options, and provide opportunities to keep in touch.
Individuals
 Maintaining physical and mental health: Take advantage of prevention opportunities and
health check-ups; exercise, sleep, eat well, and be socially active.
 Sustain work ability, employability, and career adaptability: Participate in continuous
learning and career development activities in order to adapt to work and career changes and
challenges.
 Stay cognitively active: A mentally, physically, and socially active lifestyle can help
maintain cognitive functioning and prevent age-related cognitive decline.
 Proactively manage yourself and your work: Use selection, optimization, and compensation
strategies to deal with (potential) age-related resource losses, and job crafting and
idiosyncratic deals to adapt your job to your age-related abilities and needs.
Society
 Distribute work and associated resources fairly across individuals and different life phases.
 Increases in retirement age should be complemented with adequate work opportunities that
promote healthy and productive aging.
 Support flexible work arrangements such as bridge employment and post-retirement work.
 Introduce and rigorously enforce laws against age discrimination in employment.
 Support an open discussion of potentials and opportunities of an aging workforce to change
outdated beliefs about aging.
Table 4
Desirable Characteristics of Future Studies on Aging at Work
 Age is not a causal variable but a correlate: Conceptualize and examine person and
contextual mediating mechanisms of assumed age differences and aging effects (e.g., future
time perspective, subject matter expertise), and also include mediators when age is
conceptualized as a moderator variable.
 Workers become more heterogeneous with age: Consider age-related differences in
variability (i.e.., fanning out) in addition to main effects of age, and the person and
contextual factors that may explain increased variability among older workers.
 Don’t forget the context: Examine age-related changes in both individual and context
characteristics (e.g., children, eldercare demands).
 Consider alternatives to cross-section designs: Conduct (short-term) longitudinal studies
(e.g., across critical career periods), training interventions, and daily diary/experience
sampling studies.
 No “age bracketing”: Operationalize age as a continuous variable instead of creating
arbitrary age groups, to avoid loss of statistical power.
 Pay attention to generalizability: Aim for equal proportions of participants across the
focused age range; at least report proportion of workers in different age groups.
 Consider higher complexity: Examine potential curvilinear in addition to linear age effects.
 Examine alternative explanations: Control for other time-related constructs, such as job and
organizational tenure.
 Assess both subjective and objective outcomes of aging and their interrelationships over
time (e.g., not only performance, but also perceived meaningfulness of work).
 Study also subgroups of older workers, particularly those that are less privileged (e.g.,
women, less educated workers, the unemployed) and how they can be supported.
Author Biographies
Guido Hertel (ghertel@uni-muenster.de) holds a chair in organizational and business

psychology at the University of Münster, Germany (since 2008). His research includes a wide
range of basic and applied topics within organizational and business psychology. In addition to
aging at work and demographic changes in organizations, his current research activities address
process gains in teams, distributed (virtual) collaboration, electronic human resource
management, and negotiation and conflict management. His research results have been published
in Psychological Bulletin, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Journal of Management, Research Policy, Human Resource Management Review,
Journal of Managerial Psychology, and European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology (among others). Guido Hertel currently serves as associate editor of Group and
Organization Management, and is member of several editorial boards of journals, among them
the founding editorial board of Work, Aging and Retirement.
Hannes Zacher (h.zacher@rug.nl) is Associate Professor of organizational psychology in the

Department of Psychology at the University of Groningen. He received his Ph.D. from the
University of Giessen (2009). Subsequently, he was postdoctoral fellow at Jacobs University and
lecturer at the University of Queensland. His research program investigates sustainability in and
of organizations, with foci on successful aging at work, career development, adaptability, and
occupational well-being; proactivity, innovation, leadership, and entrepreneurship; and pro-
environmental employee behavior. His research has been published in journals such as Journal
of Organizational Behavior, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Journal of Vocational
Behavior, Journal of Management, Leadership Quarterly, Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, and Psychology and Aging. He is research fellow at the Sloan
Center on Aging & Work at Boston College and member of the founding editorial board of
Work, Aging and Retirement.

Managing The Aging Worforce

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Managing The Aging Worforce

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

MANAGING THE AGING WORKFORCE 1

Managing the Aging Workforce

Guido Hertel1 and Hannes Zacher2

Handbook of Industrial, Work, & Organizational Psychology, 2nd Edition, Volume 3.

Guido Hertel (corresponding author), University of Münster , Department of Psychology,

Hannes Zacher, University of Groningen, Department of Psychology, Grote Kruisstraat

implications for employees, human resource management, organizations, and societies.

needs in the growing field of work and aging.

existing misconceptions, emphasizes (partly neglected) potentials particularly of older workers,

and helps maximizing the opportunities of an aging workforce.

organizations, partly leading to age discrimination. Third, we outline central theoretical

on these concepts and findings, we derive evidence-based implications for an age-inclusive

human resource management (HRM) in organizations, as well as implications for individual

outlining desirable characteristics of future studies in this area.

Demographic Change: Reasons and Implications

born between 1946 and 1964 (Alley & Crimmins, 2007).

One potential solution to the shrinkages of qualified workers sometimes discussed is to

countries (L. Roberts, 2011).

flexible working time models (Phillips & Siu, 2012).

Researchers have consistently emphasized that changes in the age structure of

Changes in public policies, such as increases in retirement age, encouragement of workforce

therefore contributing to an overall humanization of the workplace.

Age Stereotypes and Age Discrimination

In spite of the opportunities of demographic developments described, and despite the

Activation of Age Stereotypes at Work

2015; Zacher, 2015).

< Insert Table 1 about here >

overgeneralized to “older” workers. Such misperceptions are further stabilized by confirmation

Kalokerinos, & Henry, 2012).

The prevalence of age stereotypes is qualified by characteristics of the assessor, such as

Age Stereotypes and Discrimination at Work

interest in training activities. As a consequence, supervisors might perceive their pre-

managing an aging workforce.

Theories on Aging (at Work)

focus on different phenomena contingent on chronological age (e.g., anticipating, learning,

and ending in specific theories from work and organizational psychology.

Aging from a Biological and Neurological Perspective

Biology and neurology describe aging processes at a micro-level, focusing on physical

conceptualize aging as cumulative damage due to effects of environmental factors on

individuals’ organisms. Whereas stochastic theories consider these environmental damages to be

2004; Warr, 2001).

Age Effects from a Sociology and Economics Perspective

Sociologists and economists examine aging processes at a macro-level, considering the

holistic and complete picture of aging processes at work (Mayer, 2009).

employers and organizations as part of management an aging workforce.

Aging from a Psychological Perspective

Psychological aging theories focus on individuals’ experience of aging, both in reaction

Lifespan Development Theories. The general idea of lifespan development theories is

requirements and resources. However, in contrast to early conceptualizations of developmental

related identity (late adolescence), committing to long-term relationships (young adulthood),

2013; Kooij et al., 2011).

Instead of discrete developmental stages, more recent lifespan development approaches

environment in order to fulfill individual needs. Secondary control strategies refer to

intrapersonal changes of thinking and feeling in order to compensate, maintain, or expand

conceptualization of assimilation of and accommodation to the environment). Age-contingent

understanding age-related changes of motivation and self-regulation at work (e.g., Hertel,

Rauschenbach, Thielgen, & Krumm, 2015; Scheibe & Zacher, 2013).

A second group of lifespan development theories emphasize goal orientations and

According to this model, behavioral strategies of selection (choosing alternative contexts,

outcomes, or goals), optimization (allocation or refinement of resources to achieve goals), and

potential applications of the SOC model in training activities.

2006) considers behavioral consequences of aging in terms of changes in goal priorities.

However, SST describes aging predominantly in terms of subjective perceptions of (remaining)