Journal of International Trade, Logistics and Law, Vol. 4, Num. 1, 2018, 54-64 54 THE ANALYSIS OF THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN GENERATION Y EMPLOYEES AND OTHERS IN ORGANIZATIONS: AN EXAMPLE OF LOGISTICS FIRM Gülşahiden Durucan (Phd) Alışan Logistics, Turkey Sena Ç iftçi Alışan Logistics, Turkey Duygunar Pulat Alışan Logistics, Turkey Elçin Soysal Alışan Logistics, Turkey Received: Feb. 05, 2018 Accepted: May. 03, 2018 Published: June 1, 2018 Abstract: The aim of this study is to analyze different behaviors of Generation Y employees from the others in organizational settings, who are growing in number in business life. Accordingly, a logistics firm was taken as the sample of this study to have a better unde rstanding of the subject. Within this context, the introduction part explains distinctive characters of generations, divides them chronologically and refers to significant differences and gaps among different generations. The study, in addition, summarizes findings and results of other relevant studies. The last part, on the other hand, analyzes the results of a research conducted on ninety-six employees of a logistics firm in order to examine behavioral differences of Generation Y employees in organizational settings. According to the results of this study, generation Y employees are different from the other generations in terms of commitment to parents, workplace fun, taking initiative, understanding of the environment and social responsibility, usage of social media, and dressing style behaviors; however, they do not show any significant difference in multi-tasking and attention, privacy, leadership in team working, evaluation and rewards in team working, and organizational support in team working. Keywords: Generation Y, Behavioral Differences, Logistics Firm 1. INTRODUCTION "Generation as a term refers to a group of people who were born in a specific period of history, a period shaped by certain economic, social movements, or people who belong to a specific group within the population. Generations may show differences depending on the conditions in places and environments where they grow and live. This fact supports the idea that characteristics, lifestyles and social activities of different generations may also reflect significant differences" (Adıgüzel, Orhan; Batur, H. Zeynep ; Ekşili, Nisa, 2014). Generation Y consists of a population which is defined as a group of "undisciplined people who were born between 1980 and 2000" (Kuran, 2012). Generation Y is also called the "Why Generation", as members of this generation often question and intellectualize every aspect of their lives, and criticize the responsibilities they have to take. Having grown in a technology and information era, members of this generation are more open to innovation and change than others. Individuals in this generation define themselves as "free souls", and show an unprecedented variety of characteristics due to the impact of higher education levels. According to İşçimen (2012:10), members of Generation Y, who do not enjoy being patient and The Analysis of the Differences Between Generation Y Employees and Others in Organizations: An Example of Logistics Firm passively waiting for things to happen, often prefer working in relatively free and democratic environments with freedom of expression, rather than authoritarian and hierarchical systems (AKA , Bahattin, 2018). "Particularly for those known as Generation Y, e-communication is a significant mode of communication. Lifestyles and communication preferences of Generation Y can be described as "fast", "concise" and "practical". Within this context, Generation Y is generally expected to use all available communication technologies aimfully and consciously" (Yeşil & Fidan, 2017). "Another argument about Generation Y is that this generation has different sources of motivation than others. They often do not focus on the income they earn but on innovative ideas that may satisfy them both materially and spiritually, such as flexible working hours" (Aydın & Başol, 2014). "The proportion of Generation X, people born in the years between 1965 and 1976, in Turkey's population is 16% (TUIK, 2014). Distribution of women and men in this proportion is close to each other. Besides ‘Baby Buster’, this generation is also defined as 'twenty something' and 'f-you generation' (Fisher, 1997, cited in Roberts and Manolis, 2000). This is the first generation that has ever used the Internet. People belonging to this generation are known as freedom lover, entrepreneur, consumption-oriented and also skeptical (Barber et al., 2008; Olsen et al., 2007; Glass, 2007). The youth of this generation corresponds to a period of a growing consumption trend and introduction of numerous new TV channels" (Engizek & Şekerkaya, 2016). "Members of Generation X are known as loyal in occupational life, having high levels of satisfaction, and willing to stay in a workplace for many years. Often seeking for better career opportunities, this generation was necessarily familiarized with the use of technology as they lived in an era of technological revolution. They are also sensitive to social problems, motivated in occupational life and respectful to authorities. The inclusion of women in labor force and the tendency to have fewer children are significant characteristics of this generation" (Aydın & Başol, 2014). Having grown in an era of globalization, economic growth and the Internet, members of Generation Y has become the youngest generation taking part in occupational life. In Turkey, members of Generation Y are more in number than populations of many European countries. Compared to the other generations, Generation Y has higher rates of job quits. Generation Y shows similarities with Generation X in terms of seeking flexibility in career paths, and they prefer to choose a career with multiple opportunities, assuming full responsibility for future challenges. Therefore, it can be said that Generation X and Generation Y are similar to each other in this regard (Çetin & Karalar, 2016). This study samples a logistics firm in order to accomplish its purpose, which is to reveal differences between members of Generation Y and other generations in organizational settings. The research question of this study is: "In which aspects do members of Generation Y differ from the others in organizational settings?” This question aims to reveal certain facts in order to help generation gaps contribute to relevant sectors in terms of organizational efficiency. This part of the study provides certain definitions relevant to the term "generation", while the subsequent parts refer to characteristics and categories of different other generations. Generation cohorts or groups refer to people who are in a common age group and thus have or will have similar life experiences in significant periods of their development. (Hung & vd, 2007) 2. BACKGROUND Having grown in an era of information and communication technologies, often defined as success and outcome- oriented, Generation Y currently has a significant place in business and occupational life in terms of quantity. Creativity, desire for personal development, career expectations (Taştan Boz, İlknur; Berber, Fatih;, 2017), weakness in loyalty, impatience, high levels of self-confidence, displeasure with stereotypes and rules (Akdemir, Ali; Konakay, Gönül; Demirkaya, Harun;, 2013) are common distinctive characteristics of Generation Y members. These people have higher adaptation capabilities in different situations and conditions, as well as being able to deal with multiple tasks; though they easily get tired of the task they perform (Adıgüzel, Orhan; Batur, H. Zeynep ; Ekşili, Nisa, 2014). Intensive parental attention, ceaseless praises and protective measures emerge as self-confidence and independence out of household, and commitment to parents inside families (Civelek, Mustafa Emre; Çemberci, Murat; Aşçı, Mehmet Saim; Öz, Sabri;, 2017). To mention the concept of generation before further analysis on Generation Y; first modern generation studies conducted by Auguste Comte between 1830-1840 revealed that generation gaps are significant forces that move throughout the whole history, and stated that the social development can be possible only through passing the experience down from a generation to the next one (Yüksekbilgili & Akduman, Nisan 2015). However, studies about generation as a concept date back to Cicero, who was a historian in ancient Greece, as Gülsahiden Durucan & Sena Çiftçi & Duygunar Pulat & Elçin Soysal 56 well as the period of two significant philosophers and authors of history, Heraclitus and Homer. One of the main reasons behind the recent increase in relevant studies is that today generation gaps and their behavioral implications are more evident than before. Dictionary of Philosophy Terms (Felsefe Terimleri Sözlüğü) prepared by the Turkish Language Association defines the term "generation" as "a community consisting of people who were born in the same year or close, who thus have met the same problems, the same fate, and similar responsibilities". Although each generation has specific characteristics, values, strengths and weaknesses, it does not mean that every individual belonging to a generation is exactly same. Social events, economic and political developments, and technological advances, which a group of people born in a common period of time experience, may result in different personal characteristics, behaviors, and changes in values of the business life. The age ranges used in classifying different generations may differ from author to author (Genç, 2017). Significant attempts to classify generations within the literature are summarized in the table below (Sever İşçimen, 2012). However, this study is based on the range identified by Howe & Strauss for Generation Y, which corresponds to the period between 1982 and 2000. Table 1. Classification of Generations SOURCE CLASSIFICATION Howe & Strauss (2000) Silent Generation (1925 - 1943) Baby Boomers (1943 - 1960) 13th Generation (1961 – 1981) Millennial Generation (1982 - 2000) - Lancaster & Stillman (2002) Traditional Generation (1900 - 1945) Baby Boom Generation (1946 - 1964) Generation X (1965 – 1980) Millennial Generation, Echo Boomers, Generation Y, Generation Next (1981 - 1999) - Martin & Tulgan (2002) Silent Generation (1925 - 1942) Baby Boom (1946 - 1960) Generation X (1965 -1977) Millennial Generation (1978 - 2000) - Oblinger & Oblinger (2005) Adults (< 1946) Baby Boom (1947 - 1964) Generation X (1965 – 1980) Generation Y Net Generation Millennials (1981 – 1995) Post-Millennial Generation (1995 – Present) Tapscott (1998) - Baby Boom (1946 – 1964) Generation X (1965 – 1975) Digital Generation (1976 – 2000) - Zemke et al. (2000) Veterans (1922 – 1943) Baby Boom (1943 – 1960) Generation X (1960 – 1980) Generation Next (1980 – 1999) - Source: Reeves & Oh, 2008. Generational differences, in handbook of research on educational communications and technology (Sever İşçimen, Didem, 2012) The Silent Generation, also called the generation of war, lived in 1925-1943 and experienced the Second World War together with significant economic depressions. This term corresponds to the one-party period of Turkey. Members of this generation tend to debate, reason, and they are often process-oriented, as well as being respectful and loyal to authorities. They generally prefer a balanced and established system. This generation is also known with the fact that they could slowly be accustomed to technological advances (Çemberci, Kıvanç Sudak, Aşçı, Öz, & Civelek, 2014). After the Second World War, between 1943 and 1960, about one billion babies were born and these babies consisted the Baby Boom generation. Similar to Silent Generation, this generation has a sense of loyalty, though not an absolute one. Common values promoted by this generation are gender equality, racial equality, and environmental management. Being also known as workaholic, these people are believed to have been created for working (Çevik Tekin & Akgemci, 2016). Members of Generation X, who were born in 1961 - 1981, are rather satisfied, realistic and often politically impetuous people. They are known with high levels of loyalty to workplaces, ability to work in a The Analysis of the Differences Between Generation Y Employees and Others in Organizations: An Example of Logistics Firm specific field and workplace for a long period, being sensitive to social problems and having high levels of occupational motivation. These people are also regarded as confident and talented (Akdemir, Ali; Konakay, Gönül; Demirkaya, Harun;, 2013). Generation Y of the period between 1982 and 2000 has been predominantly affected by leaders, advances, technologies, and trends of its time. Behaviors of Generation Y individuals may change from region to region depending on social and economic conditions. Their working styles, capacity to integrate with other generations, and outstanding strengths should be recognized and appreciated. These people have unique value clusters, expectations, perceptions about the authority as a concept, and ideal occupational settings. This generation is described as young, smart, venturous and they do not accept a single point to focus on life. Having strong moral values, sense of patriotism, freedom, willingness to socialize and struggle for the household as well as family values are common tendencies and characteristics of this generation (Khulida, Yean, Johari, & Saad, 2015). Generation Z, which consists of those born after 2000, is living a technology-intensive life. Also called as the Net Generation, Instant Online and IGen, this generation is considered as the new silent generation due to the individualism and loneliness they currently live and will probably further in the future. Occupational behaviors and attitudes of this generation have not yet been evaluated as its members are just on the point of beginning their careers. The data about this generation in literature is also limited. Having grown up in a high-tech environment, this generation is more informed about the cyber world than Generation Y. "Preferring computers to books and texts to oral conversations, and spending less time outside are characteristics of Generation Z. Members of this generation have telecommunication opportunities, and they often choose to live a lonely life. They expect instant outcomes and do not even imagine a life without cellphones" (Öz, 2015). Table 2. Characteristics and Common Values of Generations Source: Deneçli, www.iku.edu.tr (Access: May 10, 2013). (Akdemir, Ali; Konakay, Gönül; Demirkaya, Harun;, 2013) As prominent members of today's business life, "children and youth of this generation have highly different parents than those of the previous generation, who have more active roles in their living conditions, education and safety". Within the transition from family to business life, members of Generation Y have a sensitive approach in terms of social responsibilities. These people are focused on human affairs, cooperative, eager to learn, and questioning. Despite being interested in dealing with complicated tasks, Generation Y employees may easily decide to change jobs when they encounter simple and monotonous tasks, with the impact of desire to shape their own careers. This higher tendency and less hesitation to change jobs compared to previous generations can be explained with the strong capability of adaptation they have. In other words, these people do not hesitate to shift from a field of business to another to achieve their career goals when they no more have hope and/or a development opportunity in c urrent positions. This characteristic necessitates employers, particularly those aims for sustainability and efficiency, to consider tendencies of Generation Y employees and take the required measures during the job and process design process (Çemberci, Kıvanç Sudak, Aşçı, Öz, & Civelek, 2014). Most of today's Generation Y employees are managed Baby Boomers Generation X Generation Y Generation Z Characteristics and Values - High level of loyalty - Workaholic - Interested team working - Satisfied - Competitive - Unfamiliar with technology - Unstable sense of loyalty - Respectful to authorities - Sensitive to society - High level of occupational motivation - Satisfied - Concerned - Less interested in technology - Weaker sense of loyalty - Hard to acknowledge authorities - Fond of independence - Changing jobs frequently - Individualist - Grown up with technology - Cooperative - Creative - Born with technology Gülsahiden Durucan & Sena Çiftçi & Duygunar Pulat & Elçin Soysal 58 by members of Generation X. These employees often expect different management methods, clear rules, detailed descriptions of tasks, expansion in areas of responsibilities, inclusion in decision-making processes, investments in educational opportunities, and flexible work styles from their employers. Generation Y employees more readily work with managers who are eager to provide mentorship support, open to creative and innovative ideas, willing to create career opportunities, appreciate, motivate employees and pay attention to them, and make tasks more entertaining. This generation does not enjoy wearing formal uniforms and expects to have fun in a comfortable workplace with flexible working hours. As a result of today's technological advancements, Generation Y employees have an opportunity to work outside office settings with flexible working hours and this method increases their occupational motivation (Kuru, 2014). Members of Generation Y also desire to benefit advanced technologies in workplaces. Accordingly, they expect from employers to create technology-based training opportunities to help them further their personal and professional development. In addition, it is observed that these people use the Internet also for different reasons such as entertainment and shopping, out of office hours. There are studies in the literature showing that they often check their social media accounts and e-mails, mostly before the bedtime. Members of Generation Y use social media effectively in interpersonal relations, chatting and communication. (Yeliz Yeşil, Fatma Fidan;, 2017) Table 3. Generation Differences according to Coomer & Debard CRITERIA GENERATIONS BABY BOOM GENERATION X GENERATION Y Level of Confidence Self-confidence, rather than trust for authorities Low levels of trust to authorities High levels of trust to authorities Loyalty to organizations Disdainful Favorable Loyal, committed Desire Taking responsibilities Entrepreneurship Modeling on a hero Career Goal A glorious career A flexible career Multiple career paths at the same time Expected Rewards Title and a comfortable office Freedom not to do A meaningful occupation Parent-Child Relationship Alienated Distant Intolerant, interventionist Having Children Controlled Doubtful Determined, absolute Family Life Cared during childhood Marginalized during childhood Protected during childhood Education Freedom of expression Pragmatist Responsibility oriented Assessment Once in a year with certification Asking opinion of others about own performance Freedom to choose assessment time Political Orientation Struggling against pressures Indifferent, individualist Interested in communities, organizations Most Frequently Asked Questions What does it mean? Does it work? How could we set it up? Source: Kübra Aygenoğlu, X ve Y Kuşaklarının Kurumsal İş Hayatında İnsan Kaynağı Açısından Stratejik Önemi, 2015, p.17 (Aygenoğlu, 2015) According to Shaw and Fairhurst (2008), the factors behind today's job satisfaction are almost same with those of previous generations. Generation Y prefers flexibility in work styles and a career in which they may challenge problems. As they expect instant feedback about their performances, employers of Generation Y employees should provide clear guidelines to them (Daud, 2015). Differences between Generation Y and the other generations in this term are summarized in the table below. The Analysis of the Differences Between Generation Y Employees and Others in Organizations: An Example of Logistics Firm Table 4. Hypotheses of Research H1 Workplace fun perception of generation Y employees is different from other generations. H2 Multi-tasking and attention behavior of generation Y employees is different from other generations. H3 Taking Initiative behavior of generation Y employees is different from other generations. H4 Understanding of Environment and Social Responsibility behavior of generation Y employees is different from other generations. H5 Usage of Social Media behavior of generation Y employees is different from other generations. H6 Dressing Style behavior of generation Y employees is different from other generations. H7 Privacy behavior of generation Y employees is different from other generations. H8 Commitment to Parents behavior of generation Y employees is different from other generations. H9 Leadership in Team Working behavior of generation Y employees is different from other generations. H10 Evaluation and Rewards in Team Working behavior of generation Y employees is different from other generations. H11 Organizational Support in Team Working behavior of generation Y employees is different from other generations. The hypotheses of this research are shown in Table 1 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This research is a quantitative cross-sectional research and a five-point Likert scale was used in survey. The scale used in this research is Likert type ordinal scales. Firstly, the reliability and validity of the scales were determined. Structural equation modeling method was used to test construct validity. Subsequently, independent samples T test was used to test the hypotheses. 3.1 Measures and Sampling The scales adopted from prior studies were used to measure the dimensions. The scale in the 5-point Likert scale used in this study is ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. More than 98 distributed, 94 valid questionnaires were gathered from a prominent logistics company in Turkey. The scale developed by Berg, D. was used For measuring the Workplace Fun (Berg, 2011). For measuring the Multi-Tasking and Attention, the scale developed by Small, G. and Vorgan, G. was used (Small & Vorgan, 2009) .For measuring the Taking Initiative, the scale developed by Uzunboylu H. and Hürsen Ç. was used (Uzunboylu & Hürsen, 2011). For measuring the Understanding of Environment and Social Responsibility, the scale developed by Kaya was used (Kaya, 2008). For measuring the Usage of Social Media, the scale developed by Small, G. and Vorgan, G. was used (Small & Vorgan, 2009). For measuring the Dressing Style, the scale developed by Çemberci et al. was used (Çemberci, Sudak, Aşçı, Öz, & Civelek, 2014) . For measuring the Privacy, the scale developed by Small, G. and Vorgan, and G. was used. For measuring the Commitment to Parent, the scale developed by Armsden and Greenberg was used (Armsden & Greenberg, 1987). For measuring the Leadership in Team Working, the Evaluation and Rewards in Team Working and the Organizational Support in Team Working the scale developed by Levi and Slem was used (Levi & Slem, 1995). 3.2. Construct Validity and Reliability To assess convergent validity of team working, nine items were included in the confirmatory factor analysis after the data purification process. To assess convergent validity of other dimensions, 23 items were included in the confirmatory factor analysis after the data purification process. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted on the scales by using AMOS 23 (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988). CFA results indicated that the models have adequate fit for each model (Civelek, 2018). Fit indices of the model are χ2/DF =1.785, CFI=0.943, IFI=0.955, RMSEA= 0.092 and χ2/DF =1.440, CFI=0.889, IFI=0.895, RMSEA= 0.069, respectively. Confirmatory Factor Analysis Results are Gülsahiden Durucan & Sena Çiftçi & Duygunar Pulat & Elçin Soysal 60 shown in Table 5. In addition, factor loads are standardized and each of them is larger than 0.5 and significant. These values show the convergent validity of the scales. Table 5. Confirmatory Factor Analysis Results Constructs Items Standardized Factor Loads Unstandardized Factor Loads Leadership in Team Working 0325 0.695 1 0224 0.855 1.396 0123 0.914 1.484 Evaluation and Rewards in Team Working 0507 0.478 1 0305 0.911 1.981 0406 0.919 1.944 Organizational Support in Team Working 0112 0.616 1 0415 0.701 1.265 0516 0.312 0.523 Workplace Fun 0459 0.659 1 0257 0.971 1.357 0358 0.786 1.053 0156 0.717 1.035 Multi-Tasking and Attention 0641 0.577 1 0237 0.762 1.191 0338 0.649 1.082 0540 0.543 0.746 0136 0.598 1.027 Taking Initiative 0133 0.860 1 0234 0.922 1.068 0335 0.784 0.721 Understanding of Environment and Social Responsibility 0227 0.773 1 0126 0.858 0.994 0328 0.569 0.676 Usage of Social Media 0129 0.738 1 0230 0.620 0.862 Dressing Style 0270 0.828 1 0169 0.687 0.885 Privacy 0251 0.716 1 0382 0.872 1.060 Commitment to Parent 0248 0.544 1 0349 0.883 2.190 p<0.05 for all items Reliability of each construct individually was calculated. Cronbach α values are higher than the threshold level (i.e. 0.7) (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Cronbach α values are shown in Table 6. Table 6. Reliability of the Constructs Variables Cronbach α 1. Leadership in Team Working 0.861 2. Evaluation and Rewards in Team Working 0.790 The Analysis of the Differences Between Generation Y Employees and Others in Organizations: An Example of Logistics Firm 3. Organizational Support in Team Working 0.654 4. Workplace Fun 0.859 5. Multi-Tasking and Attention 0.763 6. Taking Initiative 0.885 7. Understanding of Environment and Social Resp. 0.776 8. Usage of Social Media 0.628 9. Dressing Style 0.724 10. Privacy 0.765 11. Commitment to Parent 0.652 3.3. Test of Hypotheses Independent samples T test was conducted to test the hypotheses. Levene test and T test results are shown in t- Table 7. Table 7. Hypotheses Test Results Constructs Levene Test Results T Test Results Hypotheses Test Results F Sig. t df Sig. Workplace Fun ,123 ,726 2.070 92 ,041 Supported 1.969 54.837 ,054 Multi-Tasking and Attention ,123 ,726 ,028 92 ,978 Not supported ,030 71.673 ,976 Taking Initiative ,149 ,700 1.764 92 ,081 Supported 1.751 61.479 ,085 Understanding of Environment and Social Responsibility 2.570 ,112 3.221 92 ,002 Supported 2.931 49.032 ,005 Usage of Social Media 2.814 ,097 1.912 92 ,059 Supported 2.052 76.000 ,044 Dressing Style ,081 ,777 1.871 92 ,065 Supported 1.915 66.896 ,060 Privacy ,027 ,870 ,386 92 ,700 Not supported ,389 64.233 ,698 Commitment to Parent 5.332 ,023 3.765 92 ,000 Supported 3.350 46.508 ,002 Leadership in Team Working ,005 ,944 ,984 92 ,328 Not supported ,995 64.663 ,323 Evaluation and Rewards in Team Working ,603 ,439 ,276 92 ,783 Not supported ,280 65.450 ,780 Organizational Support in Team Working ,944 ,334 1.372 92 ,173 Not supported 1.462 74.583 ,148 Note: 0.10 Significance Level As shown in Table 7; H1, H3, H4, H5, H6 and H8 are supported. H2, H7, H9, H10 and H11 are not supported. Group Statistics of Differentiated Behaviors is shown in Table 8. Table 8. Group Statistics of Differentiated Behaviors Gülsahiden Durucan & Sena Çiftçi & Duygunar Pulat & Elçin Soysal 62 Constructs Groups Number of Observations Mean Workplace Fun GenY 62 4.3629 Others 32 4.0078 Taking Initiative GenY 62 4.0323 Others 32 3.6875 Understanding of Environment and Social Responsibility GenY 62 4.3656 Others 32 3.8125 Usage of Social Media GenY 62 3.1855 Others 32 2.7656 Dressing Style GenY 62 3.1855 Others 32 2.7031 Commitment to Parent GenY 62 4.4839 Others 32 3.9063 4. Conclusion According to the tests on hypotheses of this study, Generation Y employees show difference from other generations in terms of Workplace Fun, Taking Initiative, Understanding of Environment and Social Responsibility, Usage of Social Media, Dressing Style and Commitment to Parent. On the other hand, Generation Y and Generation X do not have any significant difference in Multi-Tasking and Attention, Privacy, Leadership in Team Working, Evaluation and Rewards in Team Working, Organizational Support in Team Working dimensions monitored in organizational settings. 4.1. Managerial Implications This study shows fairly different results when it is examined in a managerial perspective. First of all, compared to other generations, Generation Y employees are more motivated and creative when they enjoy what they do. By this way, they may stay and work in a certain place for a long period of time. On the other hand, entertaining during working hours is not important for Generation X employees as much as it is for members of Generation Y. Therefore, employers can increase efficiency of Generation Y employees by considering their specific characteristics during decision making processes. According to another result of this study, Generation Y employees show differences than others in terms of Multi-Tasking and Attention. It means that Generation Y employees are more willing to take multiple responsibilities at a time and do not become distracted during the process. Therefore, we can say that it may be beneficial for the managers to consider these specific characteristics of Generation Y employees when preparing job descriptions and missions. In addition, the study reveals that Generation Y employees are more interested in taking initiatives than members of other generations. The difference of Generation Y employees is considerably significant and managers should consider this fact during supervision activities. On the other hand, this tendency of Generation Y employees may improve their creative abilities. Another result of the study reveals that Generation Y employees care more about the environment and social responsibilities, and they have already interiorized the social responsibility concept. According to this, adding more activities related to environment and social responsibility to schedules may result in higher levels of motivation for Generation Y employees. In addition, Generation Y has a higher tendency to use social media compared to Generation X. Hence, developing innovative models that integrate social media with usual procedures may help them convert this tendency into efficiency. The fact that Generation Y employees expect more flexibility in dressing styles than others is another result of this study. Managers may increase efficiency by allowing freedom for Generation Y employees in terms of dressing. Another important result of this study is that Generation Y employees show significant difference with members of Generation X in terms of commitment to parents. This characteristic of Generation Y employees, who are highly committed to their parents according to the observations, should particularly be taken into account by managers. Considering all these characteristics mentioned above, it is recommended for managers to develop innovative work models that may help Generation Y employees improve their efficiency and motivation. Working The Analysis of the Differences Between Generation Y Employees and Others in Organizations: An Example of Logistics Firm with a manager who endeavors to meet these demands may be a reason for Generation Y employees to prefer a specific firm or organization. Limitations and Future Research The first limitation of this study is the fact that it was only conducted on a logistics firm located in Turkey. In addition, the number of participants, which is ninety-six for this case, should be increased in future studies. References Adıgüzel, O., Batur, H. Z., & Ekşili, N. (2014). Kuşakların Değişen Yüzü ve Y Kuşaği ile Ortaya Çikan Yeni Çalışma Tarzı: Mobil Yakalılar. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 1(19), 165. AKA , Bahattin. (2018). Bebek Patlaması, X Ve Y Kuşağı Yöneticilerin Örgütsel Bağlılık Düzeylerinin Kamu Ve Özel Sektör Farklılıklarına Göre İncelenmesi: Bir Araştırma. Vizyoner Dergisi, 9(20), 118-135. Akdemir, Ali; Konakay, Gönül; Demirkaya, Harun;. (2013). Y Kuşağının Kariyer Algısı, Kariyer Değişimi ve Liderlik Tarzı Beklentilerinin Araştırılması. Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 16. Anderson, J., & Gerbing, D. (1988). Structural Equation Modelling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two- Step Approach. Psychological Bulletin. Armsden, & Greenberg. (1987). The Inventory of parent and peer attachment: Individual differences and their relationship to psychological well-being in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 16, 427-454. Aydın, G., & Başol, O. (2014). X Ve Y Kuşağı: Çalışmanın Anlamında Bir Değişme Var Mı ? 2. Aygenoğlu, K. (2015). X ve Y Kuşaklarının Kurumsal İş Hayatında İnsan Kaynağı Açısından Stratejik Önemi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, 17. Berg, D. (2011). The power of a playful spirit at work. The Journal for Quality and Participation, 24, 57-62. Civelek, M. (2018). Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesi Metodolojisi. İstanbul: Beta. Civelek, Mustafa Emre; Çemberci, Murat; Aşçı, Mehmet Saim; Öz, Sabri;. (2017). The Effect of the Unique Features of Y Generation on Organizational Commiment. Journal of History Culture and Art Research, 6(6), 339-340. Çemberci, M., Kıvanç Sudak, M., Aşçı, S., Öz, S., & Civelek, M. E. (2014). Y Nelinin Örgür Ortamındaki Davranış Farklılıklarının Analizi. Online Academic Journal of Information Technology, 59. Çemberci, M., Sudak, M., Aşçı, S., Öz, S., & Civelek, M. (2014). Y Neslinin Örgüt Ortamındaki Davranış Farklılıklarının Analizi. Online Academic Journal of Information Technology, 5(15), 57-74. Çetin Aydın , Gülşen ; Başol, Oğuz. (2014). X Ve Y Kuşağı: Çalışmanın Anlamında Bir Değişme Var Mı ? 2. Çetin, C., & Karalar, S. (2016). X, Y ve Z Kuşağı Öğrencilerin Çok Yönlü ve Sınırsız Kariyer Algıları Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi / Journal of Administrative Sciences, 14(28), 157-197. Çevik Tekin, İ., & Akgemci, T. (2016). Y Kuşağı Çalışanların Araştırılması: Konya İli Sanayi İşletmelerinde Bir Uygulama. Örgütsel Davranış Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1(2), 23-24. Daud, N. (2015). Determinand of Job Satisfaction : How Satisfied Are The New Generation Employee in Malaysia? Science Direct, 209. Engizek , N., & Şekerkaya, A. (2016). X Ve Y Kuşağı Kadınlarının Karar Verme Tarzları Bakımından İncelenmesi. Mustafa Kemal University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 13(36), 242-271. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. Genç, A. (2017). Y Kuşağının Motivasyon Beklentileri ve Örgütsel Bağlılığına Yönelik Bir Araştırma. Yüksek Linsans Tezi, 2-4. Goyette, I., Ricard, L., Bergeron, J., & Marticotte, F. (2010). e-WOM Scale: Word-of-Mouth Measurement Scale for e-Services Context. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 23(5), 5-23. Hung, & vd. (2007). A Social Institutional Approach to Identifying Generation Cohorts in China with a Comparison of American Consumers. Journal of International Business Studies, 840. Kaya, H. (2008). Demografik Özelliklerin Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk Algılaması Üzerindeki Rolü: Bandırma Yerelinde Bir Araştırma. Balıkesir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 11(20), 96-110. Gülsahiden Durucan & Sena Çiftçi & Duygunar Pulat & Elçin Soysal 64 Khulida, K. Y., Yean, T. F., Johari, J., & Saad, N. A. (2015). The Perception of gen Y on Organizational Culture, Religiosity and Corruption in Malaysian Public Organizations. Science Direct, 252. Kuru, İ. (2014). Y Kuşağı ve İş Yaşam Dengesi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, 9-15. Levi, D., & Slem, C. (1995). Team work in R&D organizations: The characteristics of successful teams. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 16, 29-42. Öz, Ü. (2015). XYZ Kuşaklarının Özellikleri ve Y Kuşağının Örgütsel Bağlılık Düzeyi Analizi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, 14. Sever İşçimen, D. (2012). Y Kuşağı Çalışanların İş Yaşamından Beklentilerinin Karşılanma Düzeyi İle Kurumsal Bağlılık Arasındaki İlişki ve Bir Örnek Uygulama. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, 3. Small, G., & Vorgan, G. (2009). I-Brain-Surviving the Technological Alteration of the Modern Mind. William Morrow. Taştan Boz, İlknur; Berber, Fatih;. (2017). Y Kuşağı Çalışanların Yönetimde Yaşadığı Problemlerin Tespitine Yönelik Bir Araştırma. Kafkas Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(16), 527. Uzunboylu, H., & Hürsen, Ç. (2011). Lifelong Learning Competence Scale (LLLCS): The Study of Validity and Reliability. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 41, 449-461. Yeliz Yeşil, Fatma Fidan;. (2017). Türkiye’de Y Kuşağının E-İletişim Kullanımı:Üniversite Öğrencileri Üzerinde Bir Araştırma. Balkan ve Yakın Doğu Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 104. Yeşil, Y., & Fidan, F. (2017). Türkiye’de Y Kuşağının E-İletişim Kullanımı:Üniversite Öğrencileri Üzerinde Bir Araştırma. Balkan ve Yakın Doğu Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 101. Yüksekbilgili, Z., & Akduman, G. (Nisan 2015). Kuşaklara Göre İşkoliklik. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi , 425.