Comparison of Generation X and Generation Y for Leadership Style Preference with the Moderating Role of Legacy Beliefs

Each generation has unique characteristics influenced by their respective historical periods. This research has explored the differences in leadership style preferences between generation X and generation Y, taking into account the impact of legacy belief. Legacy belief is an important measure that shows how individuals justify their actions, and become more significant as they progress in their careers. By conducting a survey using random sampling, data was gathered from 304 banking professionals in Islamabad, Pakistan. Results show distinct differences in the leadership approaches of generation X and generation Y, particularly in transactional and transformational styles. It was also found that legacy belief plays a role, with generation X individuals showing more respect for their beliefs. This study highlights the differences in leadership tendencies across generations, contributing to existing research on how they affect organizations and employee performance. Tailored strategies are needed to engage older employees more actively. Additionally, we suggest including Generation Z in generational studies and exploring other factors that can influence generational dynamics in the workplace.


Introduction
Generations refer to distinct cohorts of individuals who share common experiences and characteristics based on the period in which they were born (Arrington & Dwyer, 2018).Generational bonds are formed through shared understandings, common perceptions and life events, leading to a unique approach to work.Individual backgrounds and factors like ethnicity and religion contribute to the formation of a collective identity (Haiyan, 2021).Generations are classified as Traditionalists, Baby Boomers, Gen-X, Gen-Y and Gen Z. Traditionalists, born between the late 1920s and mid-1940s in the 20th century (1928 -1945), adhere to conventional values and beliefs.Baby Boomers, born between the mid-1940s and mid-1960s in the 20th century (1945 -1965), experienced significant social and economic changes.Generation X, born between the mid-1960s and late 1970s in the 20th century (1965 -1979), navigated a shifting cultural landscape.Generation Y, also known as millennials and digital immigrants, was born between the late 1980s and mid-1990s in the 20th century (1980 -1995).Gen Z, identified as digital natives, were born in the late 1990s (Arrington & Dwyer, 2018).Research suggests that discrepancies exist among different generations in the workplace, which may lead to misunderstandings and conflicts.HR practitioners must be cognizant of these diversities and tailor organizational strategies to suit the various age groups' preferences and communication styles, to promote a harmonious and efficient work environment (So Hee, & Yeojin, 2024).Scholars suggest that having a diverse age range in a workplace can bring various perspectives and better outcomes.Valuing generational differences is crucial for creating an inclusive and innovative environment.Encouraging collaboration among different age groups can boost older employees' involvement in work tasks.Teams with a mix of generational backgrounds are more equipped to tackle complex issues and make decisions.Recognizing and utilizing the strengths of various age groups can enhance success and creativity in organizations.Understanding generational divides is essential for grasping their social interactions.Businesses and educational institutions must adjust their strategies to meet the evolving needs of each new generation in the workforce (Nataliia et. al., 2023).The primary objective of this research is to examine the variations in leadership style preferences between members of generation X and generation Y. Additionally; it aims to comprehend the potential influence of legacy beliefs on these differences.The outcomes of this study have the potential to enhance the existing body of literature on the inclination towards specific leadership styles among individuals from generation X and Y, as well as shed light on their potential impact on organizations and employees.This research endeavours to evaluate the predispositions towards leadership styles among individuals belonging to generation X and generation Y.The objectives of the current study are described as follows:  To examine, whether significant deference exists in two groups of generations (X and Y) regarding Transformational and Transactional leadership style preferences. To analyse the moderating role of legacy beliefs on leadership style preferences.
Gen X and Gen Y Generation X, born from the early 1960s to the early 1980s, has unique perspectives compared to Millennials and Baby Boomers.They prioritize financial well-being, relationships with colleagues and job preferences based on self-realization and welfare guarantees.They value jobs that contribute to the organization and society, seek personal growth and continuous learning, and have a results-oriented mindset (Kam & Trippner-Hrabi, 2021).On the other hand, generation Y, or millennials, born between 1980 and 2000, are highly educated and globally connected.They shape consumer behaviour, online shopping trends, and job satisfaction.They are competitive, techsavvy, and focused on sustainability.Millennials play a crucial role in online purchases, seeking pleasure, recognition, and making informed decisions.Contrary to popular belief, they are not the sole pioneers of transforming mobility patterns.Stereotypes associated with Millennials reflect shifts in professional and organizational identities, with older generations emphasizing their skills to maintain power dynamics (Arras-Djabi et al., 2024).Researchers working on Gen X and Gen Y workers found that generation X workers tend to see Generation Y colleagues as having lower levels of organizational commitment and expectations regarding power distance, while generation Y employees tend to perceive generation X co-workers as having higher levels of organizational commitment and power distance expectations (Ümit et al., 2020).Studies show that generation Y has a higher turnover rate compared to Generation X due to differences in working styles, social values, and personal values.Millennials' purchasing decisions are influenced by trust in influencers, while generation X values monetary rewards and generation Y prefers non-monetary rewards (Vitullo, 2022).Generation X responds well to task behaviour emphasizing connectedness and commitment, while generation Y prefers fair task-handling methods.There are differences in affective commitment between generation X and generation Y, impacting work values and commitment.These generational variances affect organizational dynamics significantly.Generation X values security and co-workers, while Generation Y prioritizes independence and supervision.Generation X is dissatisfied with aspects like activity, power, and pay, while generation Y is dissatisfied with a lack of creativity, variety, and achievement.Generation Y employees may struggle in the workplace, leading to lower organizational commitment (Gaziz et al., 2023).Recognizing generational disparities in the workforce is crucial for implementing efficient training and conflict resolution strategies.Understanding unique perspectives on work from different generations is essential for successfully managing multi-generational environments.Organizations must customize human resource policies and job attributes to engage and retain generation X staff members (Bozhenko et al., 2023).

Leadership Style Preferences
Management theory has shaped leadership concepts over time, from traditional theories to modern styles like transformational and relational leadership.These theories play a crucial role in enhancing leadership effectiveness and organizational success, with a particular focus on ethical leadership.Initially, theories like the Great Man theory, Trait theory, Contingency theory, Skill theory, and Behavioral theory laid the foundation for understanding leadership (Vasilescu, 2019).Subsequently, the focus shifted towards humanistic approaches, such as participative, contingency, and transformational leadership theories, which have proven effective in disease outbreak management.Moreover, contemporary leadership styles like transformational and relational leadership have gained prominence in recent years, influencing organizational effectiveness and management practices globally (Liu & Luo, 2022).

Transactional Leadership
Transactional leadership style involves a leader motivating subordinates through rewards or consequences based on their performance within an organization In this style, the leader relies on task-oriented exchanges and contingent rewards and punishments for performance in achieving short-term goals and providing clear direction (Wakit, 2023).Transactional leadership style plays a significant role in the leader-follower relationship, as highlighted in various research.Research indicates that transactional leaders positively impact organizational performance, strategic plan implementation, and organizational commitment (Cahyadi, 2023).A study by Qurat-ul-Ain Qureshi (2023) emphasizes the impact of followers on leadership behaviour, indicating a significant relationship between followership and transactional leadership styles.Additionally, research conducted by Ritu et. al. (2021) underscores the positive influence of transactional leadership on strategic plan implementation in private firms.Furthermore, Ali et. al. (2021) found that transactional leadership not only affects organizational outcomes but also shapes the dynamics of the leader-follower relationship by emphasizing task-oriented exchanges and structured approaches to leadership.

Transformational Leadership
Transformational theory of leadership is based on high moral and personal values and organizations following transformational leadership achieve higher growth and profitability by empowering employees (Singh et al., 2022).By fostering a culture of innovation, creativity, collaboration and development, transformational leaders empower their subordinates to make decisions and embrace change (Imroz, 2023).Transformational leaders inspire and motivate their teams to achieve organizational goals by conveying a clear mission and objectives by developing trust-based relationships with team members to facilitate a transformative experience and co-create a vision for the future.Transformational leadership enhances motivation, satisfaction, and performance by focusing on employee development (Chiş-Manolache, 2022).Transformative leadership is appropriate for organizations engaged in innovative work with minimal structural constraints and the need for subordinate support and motivation, H1: A significant difference exists between Gen-X & Gen-Y w.r.t.transformational leadership style.H2: A significant difference exists between Gen-X & Gen-Y w.r.t.transactional leadership style

Legacy Beliefs
Employee legacy beliefs refer to individuals' convictions about the lasting impact they will have through their work and actions, influencing their leadership behaviors (Zacher et al., 2011).Legacy beliefs play a significant role in shaping employees' lives and behaviors.These beliefs can shape how employees approach their roles, emphasizing the importance of leaving behind a meaningful contribution that will be remembered and have enduring influence (Meuser et. al., 2019).Legacy beliefs shape employees' leadership behaviors and guide in their approach to work, emphasizing the importance of leaving a meaningful and lasting contribution (Zacher et al., 2011;Meuser et al., 2019).Understanding legacy beliefs is crucial for comprehending individuals' long-term influence and remembrance perspectives, which influence their leadership styles.Legacy beliefs can drive employees to demonstrate transformational and transactional leadership behaviors, strive for work-life balance, form a deeper connection to their careers, and engage in environmentally friendly actions.Effective leaders prioritize legacy leadership practices, such as promoting diversity, community engagement, and responsibility and accountability balance (Haynes, 2023).Legacy beliefs contribute to fostering transparent, productive, and community-involved cultures in educational settings (Andrews-Lee & Liu, 2021).The Legacy Belief serves as a moderator in the current study.H3: Legacy beliefs moderates the relationships between Gen-X & Gen-Y and transformational leadership style.H4: Legacy beliefs moderates the relationships between Gen-X & Gen-Y and transactional leadership style.

Methodology Figure 1: Research Model
The study has followed correlational research methodology with quantitative approach in order to test the proposed framework.Data is collected through cross sectional survey methodology.The study adapted renowned scales used in past researches.For Transformational Leadership, 10 items were adapted from (Avolio & Bass, 1991) multi-factor leadership questionnaire.For Transactional Leadership 5 items were adapted from (Avolio & Bass, 1991) multi-factor leadership questionnaire.The measurement scale for legacy beliefs of respondents was adapted from a wellknown 6 items scale by McAdams & Aubin (1992) known as Loyola Generatively Scale (LGS) composed of self-reported assessments of leaders perceived enduring legacy (Clark & Arnold, 2008).All items were scaled at 5-point Likert scale as extent of respondent's agreement or disagreements with the statement (Likert, 1932 ).The target population includes bank workers in Islamabad.Banks in Pakistan provide identical work environment and operate under the regulations set by the State Bank of Pakistan.The renowned banks were randomly selected for data collection.These include HBL, UBL, ABL, MCB, NBP, Askari, Meezan and Faisal Bank.Three branches of each bank were selected from different residential sectors in order to assure participation of maximum number of selected banks.Residential sectors include I-8, I-10, G-6, F-7, F-8, F-10 and E-11.Bank branches were selected from highly populous sectors where considerable work activity is carried out and also researcher convenience and affordability in data collection.The final sample was taken from 40 randomly selected bank branches.For keeping equal participation, the threshold value was set to 3 respondents per bank branch who meet eligibility criteria of respondent.Bank employees were approached with the permission of bank branch manager and were requested for their volunteer participation with assurance of response anonymity and confidentiality.The questionnaires were self-administered.Out of 415 distributed survey questionnaires, 325 filled questionnaires were returned with about 77% response rate.After initial scrutiny, about 304, questionnaires were finally selected for analysis.This number is sufficient for inferential statistical analysis.The sample was composed of two cohorts of individuals.One cohort was from members of the Gen-X with ages fall between 30 and 44 years.The other cohort was from Gen-Y and its members were under the age of 30.In order to ensure the face and content validity of the instrument, a pilot testing was carried out in which interviews were conducted from 20 experienced bank employees and feedback was received about data collection instrument (Hulland, 1999).Necessary modifications and improvements in design, wording and sequence of questions were made in data collection instrument on the basis of feedback.Questionnaire was kept in English language as respondents were able to understand its language.

Analysis
Steps followed in the data analysis begin with reliability and validity analysis using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (Thompson, 2007) followed by hypothesis testing.Data analysis was carried out using SPSS, AMOS, MS Excel and Hay Process Macro, 2013(Hayes, 2013).Exploratory Factor analysis EFA attempts to reveal complex patterns by exploring the dataset and testing predictions.It analyse whether the collected data are in accordance with the theoretically expected pattern (Yong & Pearce, 2013).On the other hand, confirmatory factor analysis CFA tests existing theory and examines whether a specified constructs are influencing responses as predicted.In CFA, researcher attempts to confirm hypothesized model by evaluating observed data using model fit indexes ( Williams et al., 2010).To begin EFA, first, the reliability was estimated (Crocker & Algina, 1986) through measuring internal consistency (Cronbach, 1951).Cronbach's alpha value was found to be 0.900.Further, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett's Test of Sphericity (BTS) were run (Williams et al., 2010).KMO index measures the sampling adequacy of responses and BTS test examines the strength of the relationships.Result showed the KMO = .929and BTS is found significant (Chi Square 8198.838,Df 210, p<0.005).Further, in EFA, the principal axis factor analysis (PCA) with Varimax rotation was conducted to assess the underlying structure for 21 items.The next essential outputs are of communalities and total variance explained.Recommended values of communalities is >0.5.Values lesser than the threshold should be removed from the analysis.Total variance explained Table 1 shows total cumulative variance of 81.601%.This implies that three components (factors) having eigenvalue >1 contributed 81.60% changes to the overall variance .Rotated component matrix shown in Table 2 shows the output of communalities and factor loading values containing assessments of the correlations between variable and components.For conducting CFA, first, the model fit indexes were examined with respect to permitted threshold.

Figure 2: CFA Model
Table 3 shows the values found for model fit indexes along its recommended threshold range (Hu & Bentler, 1999).After carrying out CFA, the model fit indexes values were found within the recommended range and therefore, assures the fitness of model.Furthermore, reliability and construct validity, of three factors were assessed to assure their usefulness for further analysis.Table 4 shows the reliability and validity statistics.For reliability, Composite Reliability (CR) is preferred in a reflective model.Thresholds for composite reliability are values > 0.7 ( Hair et. al., 2010).CR values found during analysis range from 0.856 to 0.947, which falls within the recommend cutoff level of 0.70).Further validity analysis was examined by calculating Average variance extracted , maximum shared variance and average shared variance.To confirm convergent validity, results shown that AVE values were from 0.654 to 0.832 and were within the recommended range >0.50 (Byrne, 2010).Furthermore, the values of Maximal reliability MaxR (H) fall between 0.947 to 0.998 and are within the accepted threshold of 0.8 (Hancock & Mueller, 2001).This strongly supports the convergent validity (Hair et. al., 2006).For discriminant validity, two conditions are necessary to be fulfilled.First, the MSV should be lesser than AVE and secondly, the AVE must be higher than correlation of the variable with other variables in a model (Hair at al., 2010).These both conditions are satisfied in the analysis as shown in the Table 4 above.Hence, the discriminant validity between the three latent constructs is also established.In the first step, independent samples T test is run to see the mean difference of predictors on outcome variables TFL and TSL.Results show that Gen-X performed significantly higher than Gen-Y.The Levene's tests for equal variances for TFL and TSL indicates that two-tailed p-values for TFL and TSL are 0.002 and 0.027 respectively.This indicates that the difference of means in TFL and TSL between Gen-Y and Gen-X is different from 0. In the second step, further analysis has been carried out by running ANCOVA for assessing and controlling the confounding effect of two potential covariates; gender and banking experience before examining the influence of a predictor on outcome variable.Results of equal variance assumed indicates that there exist a significant difference (p <0.05) between responses of Gen-Y and Gen-X with regard to TFL and TSL.The decision is, therefore, that Hypothesis H1 and Hypothesis H2 are accepted.Results indicate that that generation is a significant predictor of scores on the outcome variables and there exist a statistically significant difference between adjusted means (p< .05).

Moderation analysis
H3: Legacy Beliefs moderates the relationships between Gen-X & Gen-Y and transformational leadership style.Results (table 11) show that there exists an interaction effect as the p value is <=0.05 and zero doesn't falls between LLCI and ULCI (lower and upper confidence intervals), The values for LLCI and ULCI are 1.0594 and 1.5043 respectively.This indicates the existence of significant value of interaction effect.So there exists a generational impact on transactional leadership under the influence of legacy beliefs as a moderator.
Next we have to find that under which condition (low, medium, high) of a moderator, this effect is significant (Table 12).Results show that there exists an interaction effect for all three values (low, medium and high) of Legacy Beliefs.However, intensity of moderator amplifies the relationship.This can also be seen by moderation graph.Graph shows three conditions of moderator (Low, medium and high).Graph indicates that transformational leadership (DV) preference goes higher in case of Gen-Y for low value conditions of Legacy Belief (moderator) and it is lower for higher values of moderator.On the other hand, impact on DV is higher for high values of moderator, if Gen-X is the case and is lower for low values of moderator.This indicates inverse moderating effect of legacy beliefs between generation and transformational leadership.13 indicate that there exists an interaction effect.The p value is <=0.05 and zero doesn't fall between LLCI and ULCI (lower and upper confidence intervals).The values of LLCI and ULCI are 0.6323 and 1.1896 respectively.So there exists a generational impact on transactional leadership under the influence of legacy beliefs as a moderator.Next, we have to find that under which condition of a moderator, this effect is significant on three conditions of low, medium and high (Table 14).Results show that there exists an interaction effect for all three values (low, medium and high) of legacy beliefs.The moderator, however, amplify the extent of relationship between predictor and outcome variable.This can also be seen by moderation graph.Graph shows three conditions of moderator (Low, medium and high).Graph indicates that transactional leadership (DV) preference goes higher in case of Gen-Y for low value conditions of Legacy Belief (moderator) and it is lower for higher values of moderator.On the other hand, impact on DV is higher for high values of moderator, if Gen-X is the case and is lower for low values of moderator.This indicates inverse moderating effect of legacy beliefs between generation and transactional leadership.

Discussion
The generational factor in professional environments requires a deep understanding of generational roles at work.Research shows differences in work preferences among generations, affecting work qualities and leadership tendencies.This study compares the leadership approaches of Generation X and Y, considering the influence of legacy beliefs.Results indicate generation predicts transformational and transactional leadership scores significantly (p < .0005).Legacy beliefs moderate the relationship between generation X and Y, impacting their leadership styles.The moderation analysis shows that legacy beliefs greatly influence generation X more than generation Y. Leaders with strong legacy beliefs have stronger connections than those with lower levels.
These results support existing literature on leadership dynamics and development factors (Zacher et al., 2011).
Potential limitations exist for this study due to inadequate cross-sectional designs for age and generation-related processes.Longitudinal studies are more effective for addressing these topics.
To overcome challenges with longitudinal designs, establishing shorter time frames for investigations could be beneficial (Ng & Feldman, 2008).Moreover, critical control variables were omitted to maintain research simplicity.Additionally, the study was conducted in a homogeneous banking workplace.However, incorporating data from different sectors could enhance outcome applicability.Furthermore, the research solely relied on bank employees' information without considering their position, performance, or job attributes.A deeper insight could be gained by categorizing demographic factors into distinct groups.Similarly, broadening respondent classifications would improve the generalization of conclusions.Implications for researchers, theorists, and organizations can be discerned from the findings of this research.The research results suggest the importance of acknowledging and incorporating agerelated influencers and motivators into various strategies.Moreover, the discovery of the impact of Legacy Belief on individuals throughout different phases of their careers emphasizes the need for further exploration in this area.Legacy Belief plays a significant role in the later stages of one's career, indicating that organizations should consider redefining job responsibilities and tasks for older employees, providing them with opportunities to leave a lasting impact.Consequently, it is imperative to conduct further investigations into the generational effects on the workforce and understand how organizations can effectively leverage this diversity to their advantage.Additionally, the inclusion of generation Z in the latest research framework is of utmost importance, especially considering their emergence as new entrants into leadership positions.

Conclusion
This study adds to the existing literature on generational research, focusing on relationships between generations and leadership behaviours.It explored differences in generational leadership strategies, considering the impact of legacy beliefs.Results show variations in generational preferences, with legacy beliefs moderating tendencies.Older individuals rely on legacy beliefs for leadership, while younger leaders find motivation elsewhere.Recognizing and meeting the needs of older workers is crucial for their engagement.Including generation Z in future research on generational dynamics is recommended, along with investigating factors like legacy beliefs affecting leadership style preferences.The goal is to identify manageable variables influencing generational dynamics in work environments.