PERCEPTION OF EPISTEMIC AUTHORITY AND RELIANCE ON IT AMONG EMPLOYEES OF DIFFERENT GENERATIONS TOWARDS THEIR DIRECT MANAGERS IN GREEK ORGANIZATION “X”
Abstract
An international organization in Greece employs at least three generations—X, Y, and Z. Understanding the factors that influence the perception and reliance on epistemic authority across these generations is essential. Such insights would enable organizational leaders to address and accommodate these differences, thereby enhancing the level of perception and reliance on direct supervisors' epistemic authority. This could positively impact various outcomes, including job performance, employee turnover, achievement of key performance indicators (KPIs), employee integration and engagement, and other organizational objectives.
Epistemic authority is studied as one of the most significant forms of authority, with the assumption that people are more likely to trust and agree with someone they perceive as knowledgeable or an expert in a given field—i.e., an epistemic authority. When a person's authority is based solely on their official position, it fosters less reliance than when they are regarded as an expert in their field. This perception as an expert enhances the sense of authority and fosters greater trust in it. The primary aim of this study is to investigate the perception of and reliance on the epistemic authority of direct supervisors from different generations, to promote positive collaboration between management and employees. The study results reflect that, overall, the employees at organization “X” perceive direct supervisors as positive epistemic authorities. Statistically significant differences were found in the perception of and trust in epistemic authority among employees from generations X, Y, and Z. The most important reasons for relying on epistemic authority, as claimed by respondents, include the supervisor’s “personality traits,” “opinions,” and “expertise” in the relevant field. The factors most strongly influencing the perception of epistemic authority were “expertise” and “subjective compassion.”Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Ahopelto, T., Ruusuvuori, J., Stevanovic, M., Tiitinen, S., (2024). Defining Personality: Epistemic Authority in Recruitment Interviews. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly. 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1177/23294906231218385
Alasuutari, P. (2018). Authority as epistemic capital. Journal of Political Power, 11(2), 165-190. https://doi.org/10.1080/2158379X.2018.1468151
Arsenault, P. (2004). Validating generational differences: A legitimate diversity and leadership issue. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 25(2), 124-141. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730410521813
Asmuß, B., & Svennevig, J. (2009). Meeting Talk: An Introduction, Journal of Business Communication, 46(1), 3-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943608326761
Bar-Tal, D., Raviv, A., Raviv, A., & Brosh, M. (1991). Perception of epistemic authority and attribution for its choice as a function of knowledge area and age. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21(6), 477-492. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420210603
Bochenski, J. M. (1965). An analysis of authority. In The logic of religion (pp. 162–173). New York: New York University Press.
Brozek, A. (2013). Bocheński on authority. Studies in East European Thought, 65(1/2), 115–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11212-013-9175-9
Cottingham, J. (2014) Authority and trust: reflections on Linda Zagzebski`s epistemic authority. European Journal for philosophy of religion, 6(4), 25-38, https://doi.org/10.24204/ejpr.v6i4.142
Dangmei, J., & Singh, A. (2016). Understanding the generation Z: The Future workforce. South -Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies (SAJMS), 3(3), 1-5.
Erb, H.P., Kruglanski, A.W., Chun, W.Y., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., & Spiegel, S. (2003). Searching for commonalities in human judgment: The parametric unimodel and its dual mode alternatives. European Review of Social Psychology, 14(1), 1-47. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463280340000009
Fives, A. (2023). On the Pluralist Critique of Authority. Dialogue, Published online 2023, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0012217323000355
Glass, A. (2007). Understanding generational differences for competitive success. Industrial and Commercial Training, 39(2), 98-103. https://doi.org/10.1108/00197850710732424
Goodman, J. (2010). Student authority: Antidote to alienation. Theory and Research in Education, 8(3), 227- 247. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878510381626
Jeffries, F. L., & Hunte, T. L. (2004). Generations and motivation: A connection worth making. Journal of Behavioral & Applied Management, 6(1), 37-70.
Kraus, M. (2017). Comparing Generation X and Generation Y on their preferred emotional leadership style. Journal of Applied Leadership and Management, 5, 62-75.
Kruglanski, A. W. (1989). Lay epistemics and human knowledge: Cognitive and motivational bases. New York, NY: Plenum.
Kruglanski, A. W., Raviv, A., Bar-Tal, D., Raviv, A., Sharvit, K., Ellis, S., Bar, R., Pierro, A., & Mannetti, L. (2005). Says who?: Epistemic authority effects in social judgment. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 346-392. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(05)37006-7
Maslov, D. (2022). Epistemic Autonomy, authority and trustL in defense of Zagzebski`s theory. Epistemology and Philosophy of Science, 59(3), 134-148. https://doi.org/10.5840/EPS202259346
Mat, C., & Güloğlu, B. (2023). Personality Traits, Interpersonal Conflict Resolution Strategies and Coping Skills among X, Y, Z Generations. Turkish Psychological Counseling and Guidance Journal, 13(68), 75-91. https://doi.org/10.17066/tpdrd.1211929c
Lester, S. W., Standifer, R. L., Schultz, N. J., & Windsor, J. M. (2012). Actual Versus Perceived Generational Differences at Work: An Empirical Examination. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 19(3), 341-354. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1548051812442747
Njegovan, B. R., Vukadinović, M., & Nešić, L. G. (2011). Characteristics and Types of Authority: the Attitudes of Young People. A Case Study. Sociológia, 43(6), 657-673.
Patterson, C. K. (2007). The Impact of Generational Diversity in the Workplace. Diversity Factor, 15(3), 17-22.
Podis, L. A., & Podis, J. A. (1999). Working with Student Writers: Essays on Tutoring and Teaching. New York: Peter Lang.
Raviv, A., Bar‐Tal, D., Raviv, A., & Abin, R. (1993). Measuring epistemic authority: studies of politicians and professors. European Journal of Personality, 7(2), 119-138. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1002/per.2410070204
Roth-Cohen, O., Rosenberg, H., Lissitsa, S. (2022). Are you talking to me? Generation X, Y, Z responses to mobile advertising. Convergence, 28(3), 761-780. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565211047342
Salahuddin, M. M. (2010). Generational Differences Impact on Leadership Style And Organizational Success. Journal of Diversity Management (JDM), 5(2) 1-6.
Sekaran, U. & Bougie, R. (2016). Research Methods for Business A Skill-Building Approach. 7 red. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Smola, K. W., & Sutton, C. D. (2002). Generational Differences: Revisiting Generational Work Values for the New Millennium. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(4), 363-382. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.147
Stelling, D. (2023). Do applicants from Generation X, Y, Z differ in personality traits? data from selection procedures in aviation (1987–2019). Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1173622. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1173622
Strauss, N. & Howe, W. (1991). Generations. 5th red. New York City: William Morrow & Co.
Tapscott, D. (2008). Grown up digital: How the net generation is changing your world. 1 red. New York City: McGraw-Hills.
Taşbaşı, K. (2023). Objection to generational research in communication studies: a theoretical critique[Objeción a la investigación generacional en los estudios de comunicación: una crítica teórica]. Vivat Academia, 157, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.15178/va.2024.157.e1504
Wolfinger, E.; McCrindle, M. (2009). The ABC of XYZ: Understanding the Global Generations. Bella Vista: McCrindle Research Pty Ltd.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.22190/FUEO241127015K
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
© University of Niš, Serbia
Creative Commons License CC BY-NC-ND
ISSN 0354-4699 (Print)
ISSN 2406-050X (Online)