© 2020 ijrar september 2020, volume 7, issue 3 happiness ...ijrar.org/papers/ijrar19s1621.pdf ·...

© 2020 IJRAR September 2020, Volume 7, Issue 3 www.ijrar.org (E-ISSN 2348-1269, P- ISSN 2349-5138)

IJRAR19S1621 International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews (IJRAR) www.ijrar.org 7

Happiness And Meaningfulness Among Generation Y

In India Snehal Mhatre

Research Scholar

Dr Upasna A. Agarwal

Associate Professor

Dr Nikhil Kewalkrishna Mehta

Associate Professor

National Institute of Industrial Engineering

Mumbai, India

Abstract

Generation Y is the gen-next; according to Montes (2017), about 75 percent of the global workforce would be

represented by generation Y. This is the reason as to why organizations and academicians alike are keen to study this

generation to know what effectively drives them. The present qualitative study aims to explore the meaning of

‘Happiness and Meaningfulness’ among generation Y in one of the most cosmopolitan modern Indian cities, Mumbai.

In its findings, the study reported that achievement, family, friends, nurturing their own hobbies& physical activities

are some of the prime activities of Gen Y; besides, and quite interestingly, the study notes that this generation does find meaningfulness & happiness in spiritual activities and learning. ‘Achievement’ has therefore been the most important

factor for happiness and meaningfulness among Gen Y.

Key words: Happiness, Meaningfulness, Generation Y, Qualitative Study, India.

1. Introduction According to Montes’ Report (2017), Generation Y, also referred as the ‘millennial’ is the next big generation. A recent

study by Deloitte Seventh Annual Millennial Survey (2018) reported that the millennial desire to work in a positive

culture; in other words, they prefer to work in organizations that make a positive impact through meaningful work for

instance, contributing to society. They value continuous learning (Naim &Lenka, 2017), are motivated, and prefer fun

at the workplace. The generation cohort theory suggests that generations were distinguished based on individuals born

within a same period of time, whereby they experience similar value system, have similar perceptions and attitudes

(Kupperschmidt, 2000). Mostly Gen- Y, are born with stable family background, with multicultural and technology

rich contextual environments(Naim &Lenka 2017).

India’s Gen-Y population is bigger than China or the US (Bloomberg News analysis of United Nations 2017) defining

the age group of 18 to 35.According to Voice of Asia, Deloitte Universal press,(2017) India has median population of

27.3 years as compared to that of 35 years for china and 47 years for Japan. India is predicted to have around 390 million

millennial cohorts, and would account for half of the workforce in Asia (Voice of Asia, Deloitte Universal Press 2017).

Therefore, in order to engage and retain Gen-Y, it is crucial for organizations to keep them happy by providing

meaningful work.

In the UN’s World Happiness Report (2018), India ranked 133rd among 156 countries in the world; this, despite it having

increased its Gross Domestic Profit (GDP) in the recent times. Gen-Y Indians have been noted to lack social support,

have become less generous, more worried, sad and angry (India spend, 2018).According to survey conducted by Cigna

Health Insurance company ,95 percent of Gen-Y in India were stressed at workplace and 86 percent of employees

agreed that workplace wellness programs are important (Economics Times 2019).Interestingly, it was also noted that

people tended to place more importance on their own happiness, rather than the happiness of their surroundings at large

(Diener,2000).The happiness literature was started in the ’70s and flourished post 2000; since then, many studies have

been conducted on happiness, especially in the fields of social sciences, economics, among others (Bruni and Porta,

2007; Sarracino,2013). Happiness has been defined as an aspect of subjective well-being (Lu and Gilmour, 2006).

Extant research supports that the subjective well-being of an individual is indeed a reliable source to predict the well–

being of a society at large (Sabatini 2014). Everybody wants to be happy either by achieving something, or doing they

love, which in turn help in establishing their goals in life. Extant literature suggested that happiness of human beings

http://www.ijrar.org/



depend upon various constructs: for instance, economic stability (Diener & Biswas-Diener, 2002), being religious,

positive and negative feelings, relationship, superior mental health (Koivumaa-Honkanen et al 2004), national culture,

etc. Therefore happy workplaces tend to enhance employee performance.

Meaningfulness on the other hand, refers to the level of significance one feels for any work they perform (Pratt &

Ashforth, 2003); activities that give a ‘meaning’ or ‘sense’ leads to ‘meaningfulness’ for an individual. Though

happiness and meaningfulness sound similar, extant research states that essentially, they are two different constructs.

Employees for instance, look for ‘meaningfulness’ in their job roles, which in turn make them happy at the workplace.

It is thereby vital for organizations to understand the significance of these two terms among employees, as they directly

and proportionately enhance employee productivity, engagement and performance thereof (Amortegui, 2014).

There has been a growing academic interest in the field of Happiness and Ge n-Y research, albeit

separately. Nevertheless, it may be added that there has hardly been any attempt to explore the effects of happiness

and meaningfulness among Gen-Y in the Indian context. In this study therefore, we have tried to explore subjective

happiness coupled with meaningfulness of Gen-Y in the Indian context using a qualitative approach, looking into factors,

which possibly motivate Gen-Y in their quest for happiness and meaningfulness.

Therefore, this study determines the activities that gives the happiness and meaningfulness to generation Y to enhance

the retention and engagement of generation Y. The study can act as preliminary manuscript for potential forthcoming

researcher and HR practioners who might be concerned in understanding the happiness and meaningfulness among

generation Y in Indian context. We prepared an open-ended questionnaire for Gen-Y, through which we attempted to

explore factors, which lead to happiness and meaningfulness. The objective of our study is two-fold: one, identify

factors triggering happiness to Gen-Y; identify factors in which they find ‘meaningfulness’. The research questions of this study is as follows: 1) what makes India’s Gen-Y happy? 2) Which activities give ‘meaningfulness’ to this

generation?

2. Literature Review

2.1 Gen-Y

Extant literature has also referred to Gen-Y as ‘millennial’(Strauss & Howe, 2000), ‘Net Generation’ (Shaw &Fairhurst,

2008),‘Generation Next’(Zemke, Raines, & Filipezak, 2000; Martin, 2005),‘Gen Me’(Twenge, 2006), and ‘Echo

Boomers’(Edge, 2013).Typically, Gen-Y are those who’re born between 1981 and 1999 (Meriac, Woehr &Banister,

2010). They desire continuous learning within the workplace; if an organization fails to provide this work condition,

it would be difficult for them to retain Gen-Y(Hoole& Bonnema, 2015).Additionally, Generation Y prefer to multitask,

whereby their work benefits themselves as well as the organization (White, 2011).This generation is tech-savvy,

adaptive, are ready to accept new changes, tolerant towards different cultures, religions, sexual orientations, etc. (Brown

2009). They understand the importance and weightage of their ‘personal life’ and thereby prefer to work flexible hours

at workplaces.

Srinivasan (2012) reported that the Indian Gen-Y prefer to work in organizations that are willing to invest in them,

providing them with learning opportunities, whereby they can grow to the next level; they also prefer a fun working

environment. Another study by Naim& Lenka (2018), proposed a holistic framework in an organization’s management

strategy, whereby they could look to retain and develop Gen-Y; they include: mentoring, strategic leadership, social

media and knowledge sharing. The previous research concluded that Gen-Y value supportive organizational

environment, and are greatly influenced by the mentoring they receive for their intention to stay in the organisation

(Naim & Lenka 2017; Srinivasan 2012). Indian Generation Y is considered to be most demanding workforce who values

work life balance and learning opportunities. This generation is tech savvy, ambitious, adaptive to change, feels

comfortable in casual environment (Arora &Dhole 2019). They have risk taking abilities (Gupta 2019).




2.2 Happiness Happiness has been defined as a subjective wellbeing; i.e. people tend to choose how they’d want to define happiness

for themselves. For instance, some people may feel happy in reading,

earning high income, (Diener & Biswas-Diener, 2002), while some may find happiness in creative expressions like

painting, dancing. By and large, happiness has been divided into two: hedonic and eudaimonic views; the former refers

to pleasant feelings and absence of negative feelings and later refers to doing things which are meaningful and satisfying

in life (Ryan and Deci, 2001; Ryff & Singer, 2008).Happiness is valued by every humanbeing (Diener, 2002), and is

associated with positive effects on mental and physical health (Ryff & Singer, 2003).It has been positively associated

with organizational success (Boehm& Lyubomirsky 2008; Jonah et al 2019), while has been negatively related to stress,

depression etc. (Jonah et al., 2019). Happiness is equally related to self-satisfying outcomes (Jonah et al 2019) in which

the ultimate goal of any human being is to be happy in life. According to World Happiness Report 2019, engaging in

prosocial behavior promotes happiness to individuals (Aknin 2019). Happiness moderated the relationship between

employee engagement and burnout (Santhanam &Srinivas 2019).

2.3Meaningfulness

Meaningful work has always been associated with high engagement (Ulrich &Ulrich, 2012) and wellbeing among

employees (Soane et. al., 2013). Meaningfulness allows people to think about the past, future, and even across a time

span. For example: any activity done to achieve a goal may seem difficult at the outset; nevertheless, we tend to persist,

and thereby in the process may continue to face hardships in looking to fulfil the desired goal (Baumeister et al,

2015).Therefore, meaningfulness gives a purpose to an individual in life to live; thus, it has been negatively related to

perceived stress, anxiety and depression (Jonah eta al 2019).A study conducted by Devry University on millennial in US (2010, 2011), concluded that 71 percent of millennia preferred doing meaningful work as one of the important factors

for their career success. Meaningful experiences are characterized with the notion that the work is significant (Bailey et

al 2017; MK Stein et al 2019). Meaningful work attributes the sense of personal growth and fulfillment of higher purpose

(Di ketal 2013; M-K Stein et al 2019).

Victor Frankl, a psychiatrist and survivor of the Nazi concentration camps, in his book ‘Man`s search for meaning’

stated that if human beings are able to find meaning in their suffering, they can survive anyhow in their life. Further, he

affirms that every human being tries to find meaning and purpose in whatever they do and if they find the meaning, they

can sustain (Frankl 1984).

According to Kantian definition of meaningful work, if an employee is given a meaningful work it can improve the

quality and productivity of the organization (Bowie, 1998).In fact, from an organizational perspective, when employees

sense meaningfulness in their work, it leads to job satisfaction, whereby one leverages upon the positive energy drawn

from the other while helping them at work (Dwyer et. al., 2013; Clercq et. al., 2019).Employees are intrinsically

motivated to work, especially if they find the work to be meaningful (Ryan& Deci, 2004).Meaningful work gives them

a sense of doing something worth it, and organizations should thereby encourage more meaningfulness in work (Bailey

et al, 2016). Meaningfulness, on the other hand is a different construct from subjective wellbeing (Monnot &Beehr,

2014).For instance, one can be happy but less meaningful in one’s own life; it could also be that while one finds more

meaningfulness in life, but is less happy (Baumeister 2013).However, one cannot deny that there are several similarities

in happiness and meaningfulness (Baumeister et al 2013).

2.4 Outcomes of Happiness and Meaningfulness As seen earlier, happiness has been associated with various individual and organizational outcomes. It was reported that

happiness was strongly correlated with good physical and mental health, (Sabatini 2014;Diener and Seligman 2002),

work performance, fulfilling relationship, and long life (Lyubomirsky et al 2005).Meaningfulness is considered to be a

fundamental dimension of eudemonic wellbeing, which reflect a deeper sense of thriving or self-actualization (Ryan

&Deci, 2001).Meaningfulness has also been found to be a significant factor for an individual’s development (Kiang &

Fulgini 2009). Based on the same, we tried to explore the factors, which make the Gen-Y happy and meaningful.

Maslow’s Hierarchy Theory (1943) is a useful framework to conceptualize the influence of happiness and

meaningfulness on outcomes of an individual, such as increase in work performance, engagement, quality life, etc.

Typically applied to motivational studies, Maslow’s theory is commonly viewed as having a hierarchy of needs, where

human beings are motivated to achieve physiological needs like food, shelter, clothes followed by safety needs that are

secured relationships, safe society and environment. Love needs refer to the need of love, belongingness and affection




of loved ones, including friends and family. Esteem needs refer to appreciation, respect from others in society, desiring

achievement, reputation, prestige, etc. While self-actualization refers to become what one is capable of becoming.

3. Research Methodology

3.1 Research approach The research has been conducted in post-positivism paradigm, and is qualitative in nature. There were open ended

questions put before the respondents through Google form, personal emails, whereby they could explore meaningfulness

and happiness among the Indian Gen-Y. The respondents were also requested to forward the questionnaire to others

who fulfilled the age criteria of generation Y(i.e. born between years1982 to1997).The research was cross-sectional in

nature ,conducted between April 2018 to June 2018.

3.2 Research sample The target population of the study was generation Y within the age group of 24 to 35 years from the Indian city of

Mumbai. In terms of the educational qualifications, most of the participants were post-graduates or were pursuing post-

graduation or fellowship programs. The representative sample was collected from educational institutes and from the

industry, whereby we adopted the convenience and snowball sampling method.

3.3 Sampling Method Convenience and Snowball sampling method was adopted for the given research.

4. Data Collection Data was collected till the point where it reached to a theoretical saturation level. Saturation point in the context of this

research refers to the participants’ answers, which are found to be repetitive; herein, the researcher becomes empirically

confident that a category has indeed been saturated, and thereby the data collection can stop (Grass &Strauss,

1967).Saturation is accepted as a methodological principle in qualitative studies (Saunders et al 2018).After the fifteenth

responses, when we found no new themes emerging, we continued the data collection process for five more responses

in order to ensure and affirm that there were indeed no new themes emerging.Thus, the data saturation level was reached

after collecting responses from 20 respondents. Finally ,after rejecting 3 incomplete questionnaire remaining responses

were retained and considered for the study.

5. Data Analysis

Each response transcript was given the name S1, S2 and so on. The data were systematically analysed, following coding

procedure by preliminary coding, which in turn were filtered to obtain concise final codes (Saldana, 2013). Coding

involved data analysis whereby we had to explain the meaning of the data (Charmaz ,2006). It is a descriptive construct

capturing the meaning of the data (Theron, 2015). After coding the data, they were reviewed and evaluated by other

research members. Based on the data gathered from the respondents ‘Magnitude/ Frequency ’coding was considered for

analyzing the responses. Magnitude coding consisted of alphanumeric or symbolic code to existing code to specify its

frequency and intensity of words in the responses (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Saldana, 2013).




5.1 Sample characteristics

Respondent Age Gender Education Work Experience

S1 26 Female PG 3

S2 29 Female Fellow student 5


S4 25 Female PG 0

S5 29 Male Fellow student 3

S6 27 Male PG 3

S7 26 Male PG 0

S8 25 Male Master 0

S9 26 Male PG student 2



S12 24 Male PG student 0



S15 35 Female Fellow student 6.4

S16 33 Male B-Tech 9


6. Data collection The study being qualitative in nature, adopted the convenience and snowball sampling method to collect responses from

the participants. Data collection was done till it reached the saturation level (i.e. 20participants).After rejecting the

incomplete questionnaire (n=3), 17 responses were retained for the study, comprising of 6 female and 11 male

participants, all aged between 24 to 35 years. Additionally, out of the 17 participants, 12 responses were received from

‘Google form’ and 5 responses were received from personal emails.

7. Research Instrument Section I: a self-constructed biographical questionnaire was designed by one of the researchers, soliciting demographic

information from the respondents based on their age, education, work experience &gender. Complete confidentiality of

their responses have been maintained.

Section II: open-ended questionnaire was put before the respondents, whereby

we assessed the face validity of the questionnaire with the help of experts, wherein they either wrote their comments on

each item, or advised to add a new item.

8. Data Analysis

Depending upon the type of responses received from participants, magnitude coding was used consisting of symbolic

or alphanumeric codes, which indicated their frequency along with the intensity in the content (Miles &Huberman;

Saldana, 2014).




Fig 1: Word frequency Range of Happiness &Meaningfulness

From Fig.1 it is evident that there are seven words, which were used more than 10 times, like achievement, family,

friends, hobbies like music, dancing etc, physical activities, helping others. Eight words were used six to ten times

through which the generation Y found happiness & meaningfulness; these included: being with nature, spiritual

activities, being cared for, humor, money etc. Nine words were used three to five times wherein generation Y loved to

see positivity in surroundings, satisfaction, being with children, happiness in others, success, love peace etc. Thirty two

words were used only one to two times; these included ethics, human values, courage, leisure, etc. Thus, it maybe

concluded that generation Y finds more happiness and meaningfulness in achievement, family, hobbies, friends etc.

In the final analysis, we concluded that the word ‘Achievement’ appeared thirty times, the highest among all the words

in responses given by participants.

8.1 Happiness & Meaningfulness Activities for generation Y:

Based on the results, it is clear that Gen-Y feels happy after achieving their goals and being with family and friends.

One of the participants (S11) shared “achievement of desired goals”makes them happy. Participant (S7) shared ‘family

&friends’ determine happiness for them; participant (S12) shared “Achieving my goals, making people around me

happy” gives happiness. Thus most of the participants shared that achievement, friends, family gives them happiness

with ‘Achievement’ .For activities in which respondents found ‘meaningfulness’, one participant (S6) shared “Helping

others, recognitions”, while another (S14) stated “My family, friends, work life”; participant (S10) shared “Time spend

on study, time spend with parents, time spend with friends, party, night out” are some of the activities in which they

find meaningfulness. Fig. 2 shows the statistical representation of word frequency.




Fig 2: Word frequency of Happiness& Meaningfulness among Gen Y

9.Discussions and Implications

The research objective was to determine the activities or the work in which generation Y found happiness and

meaningfulness. The results concluded that the generation Y did find happiness mostly in achievement, family, friends,

pursuing hobbies travelling, physical activities, learning, gaining knowledge, spiritual activities, helping others etc. The

finding is in consonance with extant research where it was reported that social support had influence on individual

wellbeing(Monnot & Beehr, 2014).Further, this research also concluded that ‘Achievement ‘was a very important factor,

which gave happiness to Gen-Y; this finding in turn is also concurrent with extant research (Srinivasan, 2012;

Lyubomirsky, King &Diener, 2005).‘learning and Knowledge’ has also been identified as of the prime factors that make

Gen-Y happy; this finding is consistent with the previous empirical studies by Naim &Lenka (2017) and Rani &Samuel

(2016).Along with the ‘Achievement’ factor, ‘Family and Friends’,‘Hobbies ’ have also been identified as ‘more

important’ to generation Y. Therefore, it may be concluded that generation Y are motivated by esteem needs, value

social support, physical activities, music, helping others, learning &knowledge, and being spiritual. It is predicted that

by the year 2030, 75 percent of the global workforce would comprise of generation Y (Montes 2017).This study can

thereby be useful to both the academia and business organizations. From an academic view point, the study contributes

to existing literature with its findings. It may be added herein that to the best of our knowledge, limited academic work

had been done up until now to explore the significance of meaningfulness and happiness among Generation Y in the

Indian context.

In terms of organizations, the findings hold a significant implication for HR Mangers, wherein they should consider

ensuring retention and proper management of Gen-Y employees through employee engagement activities; sustain their wellbeing and to create a happy workplace. We believe that this study would be critical to HR personnel to come up

with proper policies of career management for generation Y, as they value work-life quality and work life balance (Kong,

2013).Organizations should come up with policies where they look to provide some free time in the work hours so that

their employees for a while could engage themselves in activities of their interest to be more innovative and creative.

To cite an example; Google provide 20 percent of time for side projects, which motivates and encourages employees

for becoming more creative and innovative. Organizations can also include soft HRM practices for retaining generation




Y like work flexibility, learning opportunities, motivating employees (Hassan et al 2019). Further, they could also look

to facilitate collaborative learning, including training programs with the help of social media (Naim &Lenka 2017).

Generation Y can be made part of CSR activities as they value helping others to enhance prosocial behavior.

Organizations could also motivate this generation by offering challenging jobs, which would lead them to intrinsic

engagement (Lancaster &Stillman 2002; Park & Gursoy 2012). This is critical because meaningful activities and

wellbeing in employees can create a positive feeling and lead to job satisfaction and organization citizenship behavior

(Clercq et al 2019) . Further, this study asserts that happiness and meaningfulness would help the generation Y not only

to engage in their work but also in life; this finding is consistent with Kok et.al. (2014).

10. Limitations

The type of sampling method used was non probability sampling ; this possibly could be a limitation of the study, as it

may have compromised to some extent the external validity of research. Thus, generalization should be limited only to

generation Y situated in metro cities of India. Future studies could look to focus on the aspect of happiness and

meaningfulness specifically related to work in business settings, possibly under different contexts and other

11.Conclusion

The study contributes significantly to the limited body of literature in terms of happiness and meaningfulness among

Gen-Y in the Indian context. As Gen-Y seem to be more focused on ‘Achievement, family, friends, Hobbies’ etc., the

study suggests that both business and academic organizations could encourage and implement activities in which Gen-

Y find happiness and meaningfulness, which in turn would foster and sustain their performance. Organizations can

create happy workplace for generation Y to retain and engage them in such turbulent environment.

generation cohorts. As qualitative research design has its obvious limitations, future studies should employ quantitative

methods in order to examine further results of this study.

Declaration of interest: None

References:

Amortegui (2014).Why Finding Meaning At Work Is More Important Than Feeling Happy.Retrived on 1 May 2019

from https://www.fastcompany.com/3032126/how-to-find-meaning-during-your-pursuit-of-happiness-at-work.

Arora,N; Dhole,V (2019). "Generation Y: Perspective, engagement, expectations, preferences

and satisfactions from workplace; a study conducted in Indian context", Benchmarking: AnInternational Journal,

https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-05-2018-0132.

Aknin, Lara B., Ashley V. Whillans, Michael I. Norton, and Elizabeth W. Dunn (2019), “Happiness and Prosocial

Behavior: An Evaluation of the Evidence,” World Happiness Report (March 20), https://

worldhappiness.report/ed/2019/happiness-and-prosocial-behavioran-evaluation-of-the-evidence/

Bailey, C, Madden ,A, Alfes ,K, Shantz ,A , Soane,E.,(2017 ).The mismanaged soul: Existential labor and the erosion

of meaningful work .Human Resource Management Review, 27 ,416-430.

Bailey, C. and Madden, A. (2017). ‘Time reclaimed: temporality and the experience of meaningful work’.Work,

Employment & Society, 31, 3–18.

Barber, Afton, (2014). "Exploring Generational Differences Between Generation Y and Baby Boomers in Work-Life

Balance" Human Resource Development Theses and Dissertations. Paper 2. http://hdl.handle.net/10950/218.


https://www.fastcompany.com/3032126/how-to-find-meaning-during-your-pursuit-of-happiness-at-work

https://www.fastcompany.com/3032126/how-to-find-meaning-during-your-pursuit-of-happiness-at-work

https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-05-2018-0132

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10534822



Baumeister R, Vohs, K, Aaker J and Garbinsky,E.(2013) “Some key differences between a happy life and a meaningful

life” The Journal of Positive Psychology, 8(6), 505-516.

Beehr, T. A., Farmer, S. J., Glazer, S., Gudanowski, D.M., & Nair, V. N. (2003). The enigma of social support and

occupational stress: Source congruence and gender role effects. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 8(3), 220–

231.

Bhattacharyya,P, Jena,L and Pradhan,S.,(2018). Does “meaningful gamification” address gen Y needs? Exploring its

influence on creating meaningful engagement for gen Y workers .Human Resource Management International Digest,

26 (1),11-13.

Bolton, R.N. et al, (2013). Understanding Generation Y and their use of social media: A review and research agenda.

Journal of Service Management, 24 (3), 245-267.

Bowie ,N ,A Kantian.(1998) .Theory of Meaningful Work. Journal of Business Ethics. 17,(9-10),1083-1092.

Bloomberg News analysis of United Nations population-projection data retrieved on 26 March, 2019 from

https://www.livemint.com/Politics/a0y9fkiCenfbxsPqifJWaK/India-seen-topping-global-labour-force-in-next-decade-

data.html.

Cran C (2010). 101 ways to make generation X,Y, and Zommers happy at workplace. Vancouver: Synthesis at Work.

Clercq, Haq, Azeem, (2019) "Why happy employees help: How meaningfulness, collectivism, and support transform

job satisfaction into helping behaviours", Personnel Review, 48(4),1001-1021.https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-02-2018-

0052.

Deloitte Seventh Annual Survey on Millennial (2018) retrieved March 25, 2019 From

https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/About-Deloitte/gx-2018-millennial-survey-

report.pdf.

Deci, E. and Ryan, R. (2004), Handbook of Self-Determination Research, University of Rochester Press, Rochester,

NY.

Diener, E. (2000). “Subjective Well-being: The Science of Happiness and a Proposal for a National Index”, American

Psychologist 55, 34–43.

Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). “ Very happy people”. Psychological Science, 13, 81–84.

Diener, E. & Biswas-Diener, R. (2002).Will money increase subjective well-being?. Social Indicators Research

57:119.https://doi.org/10.1023/A:10144411319119.

Dik, B. J., Steger, M. F., Fitch-Martin, A. R. and Onder, C. C. (2013). ‘Cultivating meaningfulness at work’. In Hicks,

J. A. and Routledge, C. (Eds), The Experience of Meaning in Life. Dordrecht: Springer,363–77.

Dwyer, P.C., Bono, J.E., Snyder, M., Nov, O. and Berson, Y. (2013), “Sources of volunteer motivation: transformational

leadership and personal motives influence volunteer outcomes”, Non profit Management and Leadership . 24( 2),181-

206.

Economics Times (2018) . 95% millennials stressed in India, work is the main trigger” Retrieved on 7 July 2019 from

//economicstimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/6536099.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_

campaign=cppst


https://www.livemint.com/Politics/a0y9fkiCenfbxsPqifJWaK/India-seen-topping-global-labour-force-in-next-decade-data.html

https://www.livemint.com/Politics/a0y9fkiCenfbxsPqifJWaK/India-seen-topping-global-labour-force-in-next-decade-data.html

https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/About-Deloitte/gx-2018-millennial-survey-report.pdf

https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/About-Deloitte/gx-2018-millennial-survey-report.pdf



Fisher, CD., (2010)."Happiness at work" International journal of management reviews,

12 (4), 384-412.

Frankl, Viktor E.(1984). Man’s Search for Meaning: An Introduction to Logotherapy, 3rd ed. New York: Simon &

Schuster.

Gray,B, Bougon,M, Donnellon,A .(1985). Organizations as Constructions and Destructions of Meaning . journal of

management. 11(2,), 83-98.

Glaser BG, Strauss AL (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago:

Aldine.

Hassan, M; Jambulingam, M; Alam, M; Islam,S (2019). Redesigning The Retention Strategy

Against The Emerging Turnover Of Generation Y: Revisiting The Long-Standing Problems From 20th To 21st Century.

International Journal of Entrepreneurship . 23, ( 2).

Hoole, C., & Bonnema, J. (2015). Work engagement and meaningful work across generational cohorts. SA Journal of

Human Resource Management 13,(1).

Kok, J. K., et al.( 2014) “Meaningful life and happiness”: Perspective from Malaysian Youth. The Social Science

Journal, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2014.10.002.

Koltko-Rivera, M (2006) .Rediscovering the Later Version of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs: Self-Transcendence and Opportunities for Theory, Research, and Unification. Review of General Psychology 10,( 4), 302–317 1089-

2680/06/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/1089-2680.10.4.302.

Kaplin,A, and Anzaldi ,L.(2015) “New Movement in Neuroscience: A Purpose-Driven Life Cerebrum.

Karen Edge .(2014) .A review of the empirical generations at work research: implications for school leaders and future

research, School Leadership & Management, 34:2, 136-155, DOI: 10.1080/13632434.2013.869206 .

Kiang L; Fuligni A(2010) “Meaning in Life as a Mediator of Ethnic Identity and Adjustment

Among Adolescents from Latin, Asian, and European American Backgrounds” J Youth Adolescence 39:1253–1264

DOI 10.1007/s10964-009-9475-z

Kupperschmidt, B.R. (2000). “Multigeneration employees: strategies for effective management”, The Health Care

Manager, 19 (1,) 65-76.

Lancaster, L.C., Stillman, D. (2002). When Generations Collide: who they are, why they Clash how to Solve the

Generational Puzzle at Work. Harper Collins Publishers, Inc, New York, NY.

Lyubomirsky, S, King,L, Diener, E., (2005). The Benefits of Frequent Positive Affect: Does Happiness Lead to Success?

American psychological Association, Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 803-855.

Lu, L., & Gilmour, R. (2006). “ Individual-oriented and socially oriented cultural conceptions of subjective well-being:

Conceptual analysis and scale development”. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 9, 36–49.

Martin, C. A. (2005). From high maintenance to high productivity: What managers need

to know about Generation Y. Industrial and Commercial Training, 37(1), 39-44.

doi:10.1108/00197850510699965.


http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/014920638501100212



http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2014.10.002

https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2013.869206



Meriac, J.P., Woehr, D.J., & Banister, C. (2010). Generational differences in work ethic: An examination of

measurement equivalence across three cohorts. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(2), 315–324.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Monnot, M, Beehr .T, (2014). “Subjective well-being at work: Disentangling source effects of stress and support on

enthusiasm, contentment, and meaningfulness”. Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 204–218.

Montes, J. (2017), Millennial Workforce: Cracking the Code to Generation Y in Your Company, [e-book], Lulu

Publishing Services, available at: Google Books books.google.com.

Naim, M. F., & Lenka, U. (2018). Development and retention of Generation Y employees: a conceptual

framework. Employee Relations, 40(2), 433-455.

Naim, M. F., &Lenka, U. (2017b). How does mentoring contribute to Gen Y employees’ intention to stay? An Indian

perspective, Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 13(2), 314–335.

Naim, M. F., &Lenka, U. (2017c). The impact of social media and collaboration on Gen Y employees' engagement,

International Journal of development issues, 16(3), 289-299.

Park,J; Gursoy, D (2012). Generation effects on work engagement among U.S. hotel employees .International Journal

of Hospitality Management 31, 1195– 1202.

Pratt, M. G., & Asforth, B.E, Cameron K, Dutton ,J., (2003). Fostering meaningfulness in working and at work. Positive

organizational scholarship (pp. 309–327).

Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2001).On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic

well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141-166

Raghunathan, R ‘A Life of happiness and fullness’ https://www.coursera.org/learn/happiness.

Robinson,A(2018).Three ways you can run side projects at your company as google does Retrived from

https://www.inc.com/adam-robinson/google-employees-dedicate-20-percent-of-their-time-to-side-projects-heres-how-

it-works.html on 19 June 2019.

Ryff, C.D. and Singer, B.H. (2008). Know thyself and become what you are: A eudaimonic approach to psychological

well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9,13-39.

Ryff, C., & Singer, B. (2003). Flourishing under fire: Resilience as a prototype of challenged thriving. In C.Keyes & J.

Haidt (Eds.), Flourishing: Positive psychology and the life well-lived (pp. 15–36). Washington, D.C.: American

Psychological Association.

Soane, E., Shantz, A., Alfes, K., Truss, C., Rees, C., & Gatenby, M. (2013). The Association of Meaningfulness,

Wellbeing and Engagement with Absenteeism: A Moderated

Mediation Model. Human Resource Management, 52(3), 441–456.

Sabatini, F., (2014). The relationship between happiness and health: evidence from Italy. Social science and medicines

114, 178-187 .

Saldana.J (2013). “A coding manual for qualitative researchers”. sage publishers available at Google scholar.

Saunders,B; Sim,J ;Kingstone,T.et al.(2018). “Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and

operationalization” Qual Qant 52:1893.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8.


https://www.inc.com/adam-robinson/google-employees-dedicate-20-percent-of-their-time-to-side-projects-heres-how-it-works.html

https://www.inc.com/adam-robinson/google-employees-dedicate-20-percent-of-their-time-to-side-projects-heres-how-it-works.html

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/02779536/114/supp/C

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/02779536/114/supp/C



Stein, Mari-Klara, Erica L. Wagner, Pamela Tierney, Sue Newell, and Robert D. Galliers. 2019. Datification and the

pursuit of meaningfulness in work. Journal of Management Studies 56: 685–717

Shaw, S., & Fairhurst, D. (2008). Engaging a new generation of graduates. Education and Training, 50(5), 366-378.

Santhanam, N. and Srinivas, S. (2019), "Modeling the impact of employee engagement and happiness on burnout and

turnover intention among blue-collar workers at a manufacturing company", Benchmarking: An International Journal,

Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-01-2019-0007

Srinivasan (2012) Multi generations in the workforce: Building collaboration. IIMB Management Review (2012) 24,

48(66)

Strauss, W., & Howe, N. (2000). Millennials rising: The next great generation. New

York: Vintage.

Twenge, J. M. (2006). Generation Me: Why today’s young Americans are more confident, assertive, entitled—and more

miserable than ever before. New York: Free Press.

Theron, P.M., (2015) “Coding and data analysis during qualitative empirical research in Practical Theology” In die

Skriflig 49(3), Art. #1880, 9 pages. http://dx.doi. org/10.4102/ids.v49i3.1880.

White, M. (2011). Rethinking generation gaps in the workplace: Focus on shared values. Retrieved February 10,

2014.

Viktor Frankl (1984) “Mans Search for Meaning” Published by Washington Square Press

Sa’aban,S , Ismail N and Mansor ,M (2013).“A Study On Generation Y Behavior At Workplace” International

Conference on Business Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Engineering (ICOBIEE2013) 549.

Ulrich, D., & Ulrich, W. (2012). The why of work. New York: McGraw Hill.

UN Happiness Report (2018) retrieved on 25 March, 2019 from https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-

affairs/why-indians-are-not-as-happy-as-they-were-3-years-ago-despite-being-richer-118050300115_1.html.

Youssef-Morgan, C., & Luthans, F. (2015). “Psychological capital and well-being”. Stress and Health, 31, 180–188.

Zemke, R., Raines, C., & Filipezak, B. (2000). Generations at work: Managing the class

of veterans, boomer, x-ers, and nexters in your workplace. New York: Amazon.


https://www.emerald.com/insight/search?q=Nivethitha%20Santhanam

https://www.emerald.com/insight/search?q=Sharan%20Srinivas

https://www.emerald.com/insight/publication/issn/1463-5771

https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-01-2019-0007

https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/why-indians-are-not-as-happy-as-they-were-3-years-ago-despite-being-richer-118050300115_1.html

https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/why-indians-are-not-as-happy-as-they-were-3-years-ago-despite-being-richer-118050300115_1.html