Editorial summary. This is our text summary of an article published by sajhrm. Charts, figures, and the author’s full voice are at the original — read it there .
Licence. The original is licensed under CC BY 4.0. This page adapts it: the summary and analysis are ours, not the authors’.
Editorial verdict
Methodologically sound scoping review that maps an emerging and fragmented field — the six-theme taxonomy is a useful organising tool, but the evidence base is geographically skewed toward Asia and dominated by cross-sectional designs, so causal claims about Gen Z's workplace impact remain premature.
Executive summary
This scoping review addresses a gap in the literature by synthesising evidence on the workplace impact of Generation Z (born 1995–2010) employees — a cohort that now constitutes approximately 25% of the global labour market. The authors argue that while substantial research exists on Gen Z characteristics, expectations, and retention, comparatively little has directly examined what changes Gen Z employees bring to organisational settings after entry. Following Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidelines and reported according to the PRISMA-ScR checklist, the authors searched four major databases plus supplementary sources, ultimately including 38 studies published between 2018 and 2026. Analysis identified six impact themes: communication, leadership and management practices, organisational culture, organisational performance, digital transformation, and withdrawal and misconduct. Key evidence shows that Gen Z's influence is mediated by contextual factors such as communication channel availability, leadership style, and HR support structures. The review concludes that the evidence base is geographically concentrated in Asia (57.9% of studies), methodologically reliant on cross-sectional single-respondent designs, and insufficient in industry-specific and longitudinal coverage — highlighting critical gaps for future research and cautioning against overgeneralisation of findings across cultural and organisational contexts.
Key insights
- 1Gen Z's workplace impact manifests across six domains — communication, leadership and management practices, organisational culture, organisational performance, digital transformation, and withdrawal and misconduct — but these impacts are frequently contingent on contextual mediators such as leadership style, HR support, and communication channel availability rather than being direct generational effects.
- 2The evidence base is heavily skewed: 57.9% of included studies originate from Asia (primarily India, Indonesia, and China), 63.2% were published from 2024 onwards, and 76.3% used cross-sectional designs — limiting the generalisability and causal strength of current conclusions.
- 3Withdrawal and misconduct behaviours among Gen Z employees — including quiet quitting, job hopping, moonlighting, workplace deviance, and silence — are shown to be strongly condition-dependent, intensifying under toxic work environments, authoritarian leadership, psychological contract breach, and perceived illegitimate tasks.
Practical takeaways
- Organisations managing Gen Z employees may observe pressure to adapt management practices toward more participatory, coaching-oriented, and feedback-rich approaches, with onboarding, role clarity, and mentorship emerging as recurring factors in Gen Z workplace adjustment across multiple studies.
- The six-theme framework (communication, leadership and management practices, organisational culture, organisational performance, digital transformation, withdrawal and misconduct) provides practitioners with a structured lens for auditing where Gen Z's presence is creating adaptation demands within their organisations — though the cross-sectional and geographically concentrated nature of the evidence means local contextualisation is necessary.
Frameworks mentioned
PRISMA-ScR
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for Scoping Reviews — the reporting checklist used to structure and present the scoping review findings.
PCC Framework
Participants, Concept and Context framework used within JBI scoping review methodology to define inclusion and exclusion criteria.
References
- Tricco et al. (2018).Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR).
- Peters et al., Joanna Briggs Institute (2020).JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis — Scoping Reviews.
- Gusenbauer & Haddaway (2020).Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses?.
- Page et al. (2021).PRISMA 2020 statement.
Source & Provenance
sajhrm
Jing Wei, Zaleha Yazid, Elaina R. Johar, Nurul A. Jamaludin
October 20, 2026
Meta-Analysis/Review
Global
Original source metadata is preserved. AI analysis is generated separately.
Like this? Get the Monday Decision Brief — free, every week.
No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
Rate this article
Want the full article? Read it at the original source — free, no paywall.
Read original article