Generational Differences in Turnover Intention: A Comparative Study of Generation Z and Non-Generation Z Employees Based on Mobley’s Turnover Model

Generational Differences in Turnover Intention: A Comparative Study of Generation Z and Non-Generation Z Employees Based on Mobley’s Turnover Model | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Generational Differences in Turnover Intention: A Comparative Study of Generation Z and Non-Generation Z Employees Based on Mobley’s Turnover Model Yi-Wen Liao, Hao-Chiang Koong Lin, MengChuan Wu, Yong-Cih Yang, and 1 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7862963/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract The emergence of Generation Z in the contemporary workforce has fundamentally transformed organizational dynamics and human resource management practices across industries worldwide. This study investigates the differential factors influencing turnover intention between Generation Z and non-Generation Z employees through the theoretical lens of Mobley’s turnover model. Drawing upon a comprehensive dataset of 449 respondents (346 Generation Z and 103 non-Generation Z employees), this research employs structural equation modeling to examine the complex relationships between organizational factors, individual factors, economic labor market factors, and turnover intention, with social identity, work values, and job satisfaction serving as mediating variables. The findings reveal significant generational differences in the antecedents of turnover intention. For Generation Z employees, corporate online reputation (β = 0.349, p < 0.01), ability utilization (β = 0.178, p < 0.01), and work-life quality (β = 0.128, p < 0.05) emerge as the most influential factors affecting social identity, while inflation perception (β = 0.263, p < 0.01) and work-life quality (β = 0.292, p < 0.01) significantly impact work values. Conversely, non-Generation Z employees demonstrate different patterns, with salary level (β = -0.214, p < 0.05) and work-life quality (β = 0.565, p < 0.01) showing stronger influences on their workplace attitudes and behaviors. The study contributes to the existing literature by providing empirical evidence of generational differences in turnover intention mechanisms and offers practical implications for organizations seeking to develop generation-specific retention strategies. The results suggest that while traditional factors such as compensation remain important for older generations, Generation Z employees prioritize organizational reputation, personal growth opportunities, and work-life balance. These findings have significant implications for human resource management practices, particularly in the areas of recruitment, retention, and organizational culture development. Generation Z Turnover Intention Mobley’s Model Work Values Social Identity Human Resource Management Generational Differences 1. Introduction The contemporary workplace is experiencing an unprecedented demographic transformation as Generation Z, born between 1990 and 2010, increasingly enters the labor market and begins to constitute a significant portion of the global workforce. This generational shift represents more than a simple demographic change; it embodies a fundamental alteration in workplace expectations, values, and behaviors that challenges traditional human resource management paradigms and organizational structures. The implications of this transformation extend far beyond surface-level differences in technology adoption or communication preferences, penetrating deep into the core mechanisms that drive employee engagement, satisfaction, and ultimately, retention decisions. Generation Z, having grown up in an era characterized by rapid technological advancement, economic uncertainty, and social media ubiquity, brings to the workplace a unique set of perspectives and expectations that often diverge significantly from those of their predecessors. Unlike previous generations who may have prioritized job security and hierarchical advancement, Generation Z employees demonstrate a pronounced emphasis on purpose-driven work, authentic organizational values, and flexible work arrangements that accommodate their desire for work-life integration rather than mere work-life balance. This shift in priorities has profound implications for organizational turnover patterns, as traditional retention strategies that proved effective for Baby Boomers and Generation X may prove inadequate or even counterproductive when applied to Generation Z employees. The significance of understanding generational differences in turnover intention cannot be overstated, particularly given the substantial costs associated with employee turnover in contemporary organizations. Research consistently demonstrates that voluntary turnover imposes significant financial burdens on organizations, with estimates suggesting that replacing a single employee can cost between 50% to 200% of their annual salary when accounting for recruitment, training, lost productivity, and knowledge transfer expenses. For Generation Z employees, who statistically demonstrate higher turnover rates and shorter average tenure compared to previous generations at similar career stages, these costs can be particularly pronounced and recurring. Moreover, the challenge of Generation Z turnover extends beyond immediate financial considerations to encompass broader strategic implications for organizational competitiveness and sustainability. As digital natives who possess inherent technological fluency and innovative thinking capabilities, Generation Z employees often serve as catalysts for organizational transformation and adaptation to rapidly evolving market conditions. The loss of these employees not only represents a direct cost but also constitutes a missed opportunity for organizations to leverage the unique perspectives and capabilities that this generation brings to the workplace. The theoretical foundation for understanding turnover intention has been significantly advanced by Mobley’s turnover model, which provides a comprehensive framework for examining the complex psychological and behavioral processes that precede actual turnover decisions. Mobley’s model posits that turnover intention is not a spontaneous decision but rather the culmination of a sequential process involving job dissatisfaction, thoughts of quitting, evaluation of alternative opportunities, and ultimately, the intention to leave. This model has proven particularly valuable in organizational research due to its ability to capture the nuanced interplay between individual characteristics, organizational factors, and environmental conditions that collectively influence employee retention decisions. However, while Mobley’s model has demonstrated robust explanatory power across various organizational contexts and demographic groups, its application to generational differences in turnover intention remains relatively underexplored. The unique characteristics and values of Generation Z suggest that the traditional pathways described in Mobley’s model may manifest differently for this cohort compared to older generations. For instance, Generation Z’s heightened sensitivity to organizational authenticity and social responsibility may amplify the importance of corporate reputation in the turnover decision process, while their preference for rapid feedback and career advancement may alter the relative significance of development opportunities and ability utilization. This study addresses these gaps in the literature by conducting a comprehensive comparative analysis of turnover intention mechanisms between Generation Z and non-Generation Z employees, utilizing Mobley’s turnover model as the theoretical foundation while incorporating contemporary factors that reflect the evolving nature of work and organizational relationships. The research examines how organizational factors such as corporate online reputation and development opportunities, individual factors including ability utilization and work-life quality, and economic factors such as salary levels and inflation perception differentially influence turnover intention across generational cohorts. The investigation is particularly timely given the current labor market dynamics, where organizations worldwide are grappling with talent shortages, increased competition for skilled workers, and the need to adapt their human resource practices to accommodate multigenerational workforces. The COVID-19 pandemic has further accelerated these trends, with many organizations experiencing what has been termed the “Great Resignation,” characterized by unprecedented levels of voluntary turnover across industries and demographic groups. Understanding the specific factors that drive turnover intention among different generational cohorts is therefore not merely an academic exercise but a practical imperative for organizational survival and success. The research contributes to the existing literature in several important ways. First, it provides empirical evidence of the differential mechanisms underlying turnover intention across generational cohorts, thereby extending the theoretical understanding of how demographic factors moderate the relationships described in established turnover models. Second, it offers practical insights for human resource professionals and organizational leaders seeking to develop more effective, generation-specific retention strategies. Third, it advances methodological approaches to studying generational differences by employing sophisticated statistical techniques that can capture the complex, multi-level relationships between various antecedents and turnover intention. Furthermore, this study addresses the critical need for evidence-based approaches to generational management in organizations. While popular management literature often presents generational differences in broad, sometimes stereotypical terms, this research provides nuanced, empirically grounded insights that can inform more sophisticated and effective organizational practices. By examining the specific pathways through which various factors influence turnover intention for different generational cohorts, the study enables organizations to move beyond one-size-fits-all approaches toward more targeted and effective retention strategies. The implications of this research extend beyond immediate human resource management applications to encompass broader questions about organizational adaptation and evolution in response to changing workforce demographics. As Generation Z continues to represent an increasing proportion of the workforce, organizations that fail to understand and adapt to their unique characteristics and expectations risk not only higher turnover costs but also reduced competitiveness in talent acquisition and retention. Conversely, organizations that successfully decode the factors driving Generation Z engagement and retention may gain significant competitive advantages in attracting and retaining top talent. 2. Literature Review 2.1 Mobley’s Turnover Model: Theoretical Foundation and Contemporary Applications The theoretical understanding of employee turnover has been significantly advanced by Mobley’s seminal work on turnover intention, which provides a comprehensive framework for examining the complex psychological and behavioral processes that precede actual turnover decisions (Mobley, 1982 ). Mobley’s turnover model represents a departure from earlier, more simplistic approaches that viewed turnover as a direct consequence of job dissatisfaction, instead proposing a sequential process that involves multiple cognitive and evaluative stages. This model has become one of the most widely cited and empirically tested frameworks in organizational behavior research, providing valuable insights into the mechanisms underlying employee retention and departure decisions. The foundational premise of Mobley’s model is that turnover intention serves as the most proximate predictor of actual turnover behavior, with the model delineating a series of intermediate steps that connect initial job dissatisfaction to ultimate departure decisions (Mobley et al., 1978 ). The model begins with the experience of job dissatisfaction, which triggers thoughts of quitting and initiates a cognitive evaluation process wherein employees assess the costs and benefits of leaving their current position. This evaluation encompasses consideration of alternative employment opportunities, comparison of current and potential job situations, and assessment of the likelihood of finding acceptable alternatives. Subsequent research has validated many of the core propositions of Mobley’s model while also identifying areas for refinement and extension. Price ( 1977 ) contributed to the theoretical development by emphasizing the role of organizational and environmental factors in shaping turnover decisions, while Dalton ( 1997 ) highlighted the importance of distinguishing between avoidable and unavoidable turnover in organizational contexts. These contributions have enriched the theoretical foundation by acknowledging that turnover decisions are influenced not only by individual psychological processes but also by broader organizational and environmental conditions. The application of Mobley’s model to contemporary workplace contexts has revealed both its enduring relevance and the need for adaptation to reflect changing organizational realities. Kirschenbaum and Weisberg ( 2002 ) demonstrated that the model’s predictive power remains robust across different cultural and organizational contexts, while also noting that the relative importance of various factors may vary depending on labor market conditions and industry characteristics. This finding is particularly relevant for understanding generational differences in turnover intention, as different cohorts may weight various factors differently based on their unique experiences and values. Recent applications of Mobley’s model have incorporated new variables that reflect the evolving nature of work and employment relationships. For instance, Guest ( 2004 ) extended the model to include psychological contract considerations, arguing that employees’ perceptions of mutual obligations between themselves and their employers play a crucial role in turnover decisions. Similarly, Rousseau ( 1998 ) emphasized the importance of organizational identification and commitment as mediating factors that influence the relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intention. The relevance of Mobley’s model to generational research is particularly evident in its emphasis on individual differences in the evaluation of job alternatives and the weighting of various job attributes. Generation Z employees, having grown up in an era of rapid technological change and economic uncertainty, may demonstrate different patterns of alternative evaluation compared to older generations. Their comfort with job mobility and their emphasis on purpose-driven work may alter the traditional cost-benefit calculations described in Mobley’s model, potentially accelerating the progression from dissatisfaction to turnover intention. Furthermore, the model’s focus on the role of perceived alternatives in turnover decisions is particularly relevant for understanding Generation Z behavior, as this cohort has demonstrated greater willingness to change jobs and explore alternative career paths compared to previous generations. The proliferation of online job platforms and social media networking has also fundamentally altered the process of alternative evaluation, making information about job opportunities more accessible and potentially accelerating the turnover decision process. 2.2 Generational Theory and Workplace Behavior: Understanding Generation Z in Organizational Contexts The theoretical foundation for understanding generational differences in workplace behavior draws heavily from Mannheim’s ( 1952 ) seminal work on the sociology of generations, which posits that individuals who experience similar historical events during their formative years develop shared values, attitudes, and behavioral patterns that persist throughout their lives. This generational theory has been extensively applied to organizational research, providing a framework for understanding how different age cohorts approach work, career development, and organizational relationships. Generation Z, typically defined as individuals born between 1990 and 2010, represents the first generation to grow up entirely in the digital age, experiencing unprecedented levels of technological integration, social media connectivity, and global awareness from an early age (Geck, 2006 ). This unique developmental context has shaped their worldview in ways that distinguish them significantly from previous generations, with implications that extend far beyond surface-level differences in technology adoption or communication preferences. Research on Generation Z workplace characteristics has identified several distinctive features that differentiate this cohort from their predecessors. Barhate and Dirani ( 2022 ) conducted a systematic literature review of Generation Z career aspirations and found that this generation demonstrates a pronounced emphasis on purpose-driven work, seeking employment opportunities that align with their personal values and contribute to broader social good. This finding represents a significant departure from previous generations who may have prioritized job security, compensation, or hierarchical advancement as primary career motivators. The digital nativity of Generation Z has profound implications for their workplace expectations and behaviors. Unlike previous generations who adapted to digital technologies during their careers, Generation Z employees have never known a world without internet connectivity, social media, and instant access to information (William J. Schroer, 2013 ). This technological fluency translates into expectations for seamless digital integration in workplace processes, real-time feedback mechanisms, and flexible work arrangements that accommodate their preference for work-life integration rather than traditional work-life balance. Eisner ( 2005 ) identified several key characteristics that distinguish Generation Z from previous cohorts in organizational settings. These include a preference for collaborative work environments, an expectation of rapid career advancement, and a desire for continuous learning and development opportunities. Additionally, Generation Z employees demonstrate heightened sensitivity to organizational authenticity and social responsibility, often evaluating potential employers based on their commitment to environmental sustainability, diversity and inclusion, and ethical business practices. The implications of these generational characteristics for turnover intention are significant and multifaceted. Kuzior et al. ( 2022 ) examined the phenomenon of the “Great Resignation” and found that Generation Z employees were disproportionately represented among those leaving their jobs during the COVID-19 pandemic, citing factors such as lack of purpose, inadequate work-life balance, and misalignment between personal and organizational values as primary motivators for departure. Climek et al. ( 2024 ) conducted an integrative literature review on employee turnover antecedents across different generations and identified both commonalities and unique factors that influence turnover decisions for various age cohorts. While traditional factors such as compensation and job security remain important across all generations, Generation Z employees demonstrate greater sensitivity to factors such as organizational culture, development opportunities, and work flexibility. This finding suggests that traditional retention strategies may be insufficient for effectively managing Generation Z turnover. The concept of career mobility also differs significantly between Generation Z and older generations. While previous cohorts often viewed job changes as potentially negative signals of instability or lack of commitment, Generation Z employees tend to view career mobility as a positive strategy for skill development, experience accumulation, and personal growth (Finkelstein et al., 2015 ). This fundamental shift in perspective has important implications for how organizations approach retention strategies and career development programs. Research by Gabriel et al. ( 2020 ) on multigenerational workplace dynamics found that Generation Z employees often experience frustration when working under traditional management approaches that emphasize hierarchy and formal authority structures. Instead, they prefer collaborative leadership styles that emphasize mentoring, coaching, and participative decision-making. This preference for different management approaches can significantly influence their job satisfaction and, consequently, their turnover intention. The social consciousness of Generation Z also represents a significant departure from previous generations’ workplace priorities. Gyurák Babeľová et al. ( 2020 ) found that Generation Z employees place considerable importance on working for organizations that demonstrate genuine commitment to social responsibility and environmental sustainability. This emphasis on organizational values alignment suggests that corporate reputation and social impact may play more prominent roles in Generation Z turnover decisions compared to older generations. 2.3 Factors Influencing Turnover Intention: A Multi-Dimensional Perspective The literature on turnover intention has identified numerous factors that influence employees’ decisions to leave their organizations, with these factors generally categorized into organizational, individual, and environmental dimensions. Understanding these factors and their relative importance across different generational cohorts is crucial for developing effective retention strategies and predicting turnover patterns in contemporary organizations. Organizational factors represent one of the most extensively studied categories of turnover antecedents, encompassing elements such as corporate reputation, organizational culture, management practices, and development opportunities. Greening and Turban ( 2000 ) demonstrated that corporate social performance serves as a competitive advantage in attracting and retaining quality workforce, with employees increasingly considering organizational values and social responsibility when making career decisions. This finding is particularly relevant for Generation Z employees, who demonstrate heightened sensitivity to organizational authenticity and social impact. The concept of corporate online reputation has gained increasing importance in the digital age, as employees and potential candidates rely heavily on internet-based sources for information about organizations. Pollák et al. ( 2021 ) examined the corporate reputation of family-owned businesses and found that online reputation significantly influences employee perceptions and organizational attractiveness. For Generation Z employees, who are digital natives and heavy users of social media and online platforms, corporate online reputation may play an even more prominent role in their organizational evaluations and turnover decisions. Development opportunities represent another critical organizational factor influencing turnover intention. Briscoe and Hall ( 2006 ) explored the concept of boundaryless and protean careers, arguing that contemporary employees increasingly seek opportunities for continuous learning and skill development rather than traditional hierarchical advancement. This trend is particularly pronounced among Generation Z employees, who demonstrate strong preferences for organizations that provide clear pathways for professional growth and skill enhancement. Individual factors encompass personal characteristics, values, and circumstances that influence turnover decisions. Ability utilization, defined as the extent to which employees can apply their skills and talents in their current roles, has been identified as a significant predictor of job satisfaction and turnover intention (Deci & Moller, 2005 ). For Generation Z employees, who often possess advanced technological skills and innovative thinking capabilities, the opportunity to fully utilize their abilities may be particularly important for retention. Work-life quality and balance have emerged as increasingly important factors in turnover decisions, particularly among younger generations. The traditional concept of work-life balance, which emphasized clear separation between work and personal life, has evolved into work-life integration, which seeks to create synergy between professional and personal activities (Hansford, 2002 ). Generation Z employees, having grown up in an era of constant connectivity and flexible arrangements, often expect organizations to provide work arrangements that accommodate their desire for flexibility and personal fulfillment. Economic factors, including salary levels and inflation perception, continue to play important roles in turnover decisions, although their relative importance may vary across generational cohorts. Cengiz et al. ( 2019 ) examined the effect of minimum wages on low-wage jobs and found that compensation levels significantly influence employee retention, particularly in competitive labor markets. However, for Generation Z employees, who often prioritize purpose and growth over immediate financial rewards, the relationship between compensation and turnover intention may be more complex than for previous generations. Inflation perception represents a contemporary economic factor that has gained increased attention in recent years. Zhang and Huangfu ( 2018 ) developed a model of inflation and real wage dispersion in frictional markets, demonstrating how inflation expectations influence employee behavior and job search activities. For Generation Z employees, who have experienced significant economic uncertainty during their formative years, inflation perception may play a particularly important role in their evaluation of job alternatives and turnover decisions. The mediating role of psychological factors such as social identity, work values, and job satisfaction has been extensively documented in turnover research. Social identity theory, as applied to organizational contexts, suggests that employees’ sense of identification with their organizations significantly influences their commitment and retention (Dutton et al., 1994 ). For Generation Z employees, who often seek authentic connections and meaningful relationships in their work environments, organizational identification may be particularly important for retention. Work values, representing employees’ beliefs about what is important and desirable in work situations, serve as important mediators between organizational factors and turnover intention (Kalleberg, 1977 ). Research has shown that generational differences in work values can significantly influence how employees respond to various organizational practices and policies. Understanding these differences is crucial for developing effective retention strategies that resonate with different generational cohorts. 2.4 Mediating Variables: Social Identity, Work Values, and Job Satisfaction The relationship between organizational factors and turnover intention is rarely direct but is typically mediated by psychological and attitudinal variables that reflect employees’ subjective experiences and evaluations of their work environments. Three particularly important mediating variables that have received extensive attention in turnover research are social identity, work values, and job satisfaction, each of which plays a crucial role in translating objective organizational conditions into subjective employee responses that ultimately influence retention decisions. Social identity in organizational contexts refers to employees’ sense of identification with and belonging to their organizations, encompassing both cognitive and emotional components that reflect the extent to which individuals define themselves in terms of their organizational membership (Mael & Ashforth, 1992 ). The theoretical foundation for understanding organizational identification draws from social identity theory, which posits that individuals derive part of their self-concept from their membership in social groups, including work organizations. Research by Van Knippenberg and Van Schie ( 2000 ) examined the foci and correlates of organizational identification and found that employees who strongly identify with their organizations demonstrate higher levels of commitment, engagement, and retention. This relationship is particularly important for understanding generational differences in turnover intention, as Generation Z employees may demonstrate different patterns of organizational identification compared to older generations due to their unique values and expectations. The process of organizational identification is influenced by various factors, including organizational prestige, perceived organizational support, and value congruence between individuals and organizations. For Generation Z employees, who demonstrate heightened sensitivity to organizational authenticity and social responsibility, the alignment between personal and organizational values may be particularly important for developing strong organizational identification. Organizations that fail to demonstrate genuine commitment to values that resonate with Generation Z may struggle to foster the level of identification necessary for effective retention. Work values represent another crucial mediating variable that influences the relationship between organizational factors and turnover intention. Rokeach ( 1973 ) defined values as enduring beliefs about desirable end states or modes of conduct that guide individual behavior and decision-making. In organizational contexts, work values reflect employees’ beliefs about what is important and desirable in work situations, serving as criteria for evaluating job alternatives and making career decisions. Research on generational differences in work values has revealed significant variations across age cohorts, with implications for understanding differential patterns of turnover intention. England ( 1975 ) conducted cross-cultural research on managerial values and found that work values are shaped by both generational experiences and cultural contexts. For Generation Z employees, who have grown up in an era of rapid technological change and social awareness, work values may emphasize factors such as purpose, flexibility, and social impact more than traditional values such as security and hierarchy. The measurement and conceptualization of work values have evolved significantly over time, with contemporary research recognizing the multidimensional nature of this construct. Super’s work values inventory, as validated by Hammond et al. ( 2010 ), identifies multiple dimensions of work values including achievement, autonomy, altruism, and security. Understanding how different generational cohorts prioritize these various dimensions is crucial for developing effective retention strategies. Job satisfaction represents perhaps the most extensively studied mediating variable in turnover research, serving as a proximate predictor of turnover intention in numerous theoretical models. Locke and Henne ( 1985 ) defined job satisfaction as a positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job experiences, emphasizing both cognitive and affective components of this construct. The relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intention has been consistently demonstrated across various organizational contexts and demographic groups, with meta-analytic research confirming the strength and generalizability of this relationship (Henne & Locke, 1985 ). However, the factors that contribute to job satisfaction may vary significantly across generational cohorts, with implications for understanding differential patterns of turnover intention. For Generation Z employees, job satisfaction may be influenced by factors that differ from those important to previous generations. Research suggests that Generation Z employees place greater emphasis on factors such as work flexibility, development opportunities, and organizational culture in their satisfaction evaluations. Traditional factors such as compensation and job security, while still important, may be less central to Generation Z job satisfaction compared to older generations. The interplay between social identity, work values, and job satisfaction creates a complex web of relationships that collectively influence turnover intention. These mediating variables do not operate independently but rather interact with each other in ways that can amplify or attenuate their individual effects. For instance, employees who strongly identify with their organizations may be more likely to experience job satisfaction even when objective working conditions are suboptimal, while those whose work values are misaligned with organizational practices may experience dissatisfaction regardless of other positive factors. Understanding these mediating relationships is particularly important for developing generation-specific retention strategies. Organizations seeking to retain Generation Z employees must recognize that traditional approaches focused primarily on compensation and job security may be insufficient if they fail to address the underlying psychological needs and values that drive this generation’s workplace behavior. Instead, effective retention strategies must consider the complex interplay between organizational factors and mediating variables in shaping Generation Z employees’ turnover intentions. 3. Methodology 3.1 Research Design and Theoretical Framework This study employs a quantitative research design utilizing structural equation modeling (SEM) to examine the differential factors influencing turnover intention between Generation Z and non-Generation Z employees. The research design is grounded in Mobley’s turnover model, which provides the theoretical foundation for understanding the sequential process leading from job-related factors to turnover intention through various mediating variables. The study adopts a cross-sectional survey approach, collecting data at a single point in time to capture employees’ perceptions and attitudes across different generational cohorts. The theoretical framework integrates multiple streams of research, including generational theory, social identity theory, and work values theory, to provide a comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms underlying turnover intention. The model conceptualizes turnover intention as the dependent variable, influenced by three categories of independent variables: organizational factors (corporate online reputation and development opportunities), individual factors (ability utilization and work-life quality), and economic labor market factors (salary level and inflation perception). The relationships between these independent variables and turnover intention are mediated by social identity, work values, and job satisfaction. The choice of structural equation modeling as the primary analytical approach is justified by its ability to simultaneously examine multiple relationships between latent constructs while accounting for measurement error. SEM is particularly well-suited for testing complex theoretical models that involve mediating relationships, as it allows researchers to assess both the direct and indirect effects of various factors on the outcome variable. This analytical approach enables a more nuanced understanding of the pathways through which different factors influence turnover intention across generational cohorts. The research design incorporates a comparative approach, examining the proposed relationships separately for Generation Z and non-Generation Z employees to identify potential differences in the mechanisms underlying turnover intention. This comparative framework allows for the identification of generation-specific patterns while also highlighting commonalities across age cohorts. The use of multi-group analysis within the SEM framework enables statistical testing of differences between the two generational groups. 3.2 Sample Selection and Data Collection Procedures The study employed a purposive sampling strategy to recruit participants from various industries and organizational contexts, ensuring adequate representation of both Generation Z and non-Generation Z employees. The sampling frame was designed to capture employees across different sectors, including manufacturing, technology, finance, healthcare, and service industries, to enhance the generalizability of findings across diverse organizational contexts. Participants were recruited through multiple channels, including online professional networks, industry associations, and organizational partnerships. The use of multiple recruitment channels was intended to minimize potential selection bias and ensure adequate diversity in the sample composition. Particular attention was paid to achieving sufficient representation of Generation Z employees, who constitute a smaller proportion of the overall workforce compared to older generations. The final sample consisted of 449 respondents, with 346 Generation Z employees (born between 1990–2010) and 103 non-Generation Z employees (born before 1990). The Generation Z subsample represented 77.1% of the total sample, reflecting both the targeted recruitment strategy and the increasing presence of this generation in the contemporary workforce. The non-Generation Z subsample included employees from Generation X and Baby Boomer cohorts, providing a comparison group that encompasses the experiences and perspectives of older generations. Demographic analysis of the sample revealed several important characteristics. Among Generation Z respondents, 52% were female and 48% were male, with 84% being unmarried and 94% having no children. The majority (65%) held bachelor’s degrees, with 20% holding master’s degrees. In terms of work experience, 35% had 1–3 years of experience, 34% had 3–5 years, and 21% had more than 5 years. The income distribution showed that 41% earned between NT $ 30,000–40,000 per month, with 20% earning NT $ 40,000–50,000. The non-Generation Z subsample demonstrated different demographic patterns, with 54% being female and 46% male. Notably, 48% were married compared to only 16% of Generation Z respondents, and 38% had children compared to 6% of Generation Z employees. The education distribution was similar to Generation Z, with 51% holding bachelor’s degrees and 23% holding master’s degrees. However, the work experience profile differed significantly, with 95% having more than 5 years of experience, reflecting their longer tenure in the workforce. Data collection was conducted using an online survey platform (Surveycake) over a period of three months. The online format was chosen to accommodate the preferences of Generation Z respondents, who demonstrate high comfort levels with digital platforms, while also providing convenience for older generations. The survey was designed to be completed in approximately 15–20 minutes to minimize respondent fatigue and maximize completion rates. 3.3 Measurement Instruments and Scale Development The study utilized established measurement scales adapted from previous research to ensure reliability and validity of the constructs. All measures employed five-point Likert scales ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), providing sufficient variance for statistical analysis while maintaining ease of interpretation for respondents. Corporate online reputation was measured using a five-item scale adapted from Pollák et al. ( 2021 ), focusing on employees’ perceptions of their organization’s reputation in digital and online contexts. Sample items included “I believe my company has a good reputation” and “I believe my company has a good online reputation.” The scale demonstrated strong internal consistency with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of 0.86 for Generation Z and 0.87 for non-Generation Z samples. Development opportunities were assessed using a five-item scale based on Briscoe and Hall’s ( 2006 ) work on career development, measuring employees’ perceptions of growth and advancement opportunities within their organizations. Representative items included “I believe the company provides skill training to enhance employees’ professional development opportunities” and “I believe the company encourages employees to continuously learn and improve their professional skills.” The scale showed good reliability with alpha coefficients of 0.90 for both generational groups. Ability utilization was measured using a five-item scale adapted from Deci and Moller ( 2005 ), assessing the extent to which employees feel they can apply their skills and talents in their current roles. Sample items included “I believe the company provides employees with opportunities to utilize their abilities” and “I believe that in my current job, I have the opportunity to fully utilize my abilities.” The scale demonstrated excellent reliability with alpha coefficients of 0.93 for Generation Z and 0.86 for non-Generation Z. Work-life quality was assessed using a five-item scale measuring employees’ perceptions of balance and quality in their work and personal life integration. Items included “I believe my work has clear goals and responsibility allocation” and “I believe my work has reasonable working hours and workload.” The scale showed good internal consistency with alpha coefficients of 0.86 for Generation Z and 0.88 for non-Generation Z. Inflation perception was measured using a five-item scale developed specifically for this study, assessing employees’ awareness and concern about inflationary pressures on their economic well-being. Sample items included “I believe the current price level is higher than in the past” and “I believe inflation has a significant impact on my personal economic situation.” The scale demonstrated acceptable reliability with alpha coefficients of 0.84 for Generation Z and 0.91 for non-Generation Z. Salary level satisfaction was assessed using a six-item scale measuring employees’ perceptions of their compensation relative to their expectations and market standards. Items included “I am satisfied with my current salary level” and “I believe the company’s salary system is fair and transparent.” The scale showed strong reliability with alpha coefficients of 0.91 for both generational groups. Social identity was measured using a five-item scale adapted from Mael and Ashforth ( 1992 ), assessing employees’ identification with their organizations and sense of belonging. Representative items included “I believe my company’s values align with society’s values” and “I believe my company actively participates in social responsibility projects and contributes to society.” The scale demonstrated excellent reliability with alpha coefficients of 0.92 for Generation Z and 0.96 for non-Generation Z. Work values were assessed using a six-item scale based on Rokeach’s ( 1973 ) work values framework, measuring employees’ beliefs about what is important and desirable in work situations. Sample items included “I believe work should be able to demonstrate personal talents and strengths” and “I believe work should be able to help people grow.” The scale showed acceptable reliability with alpha coefficients of 0.81 for Generation Z and 0.76 for non-Generation Z. Job satisfaction was measured using a six-item scale adapted from established job satisfaction measures, assessing employees’ overall satisfaction with their work experience. Items included “I am satisfied with my current job” and “I am satisfied with the company’s management and leaders.” The scale demonstrated good reliability with alpha coefficients of 0.88 for both generational groups. Turnover intention was assessed using a five-item scale based on Mobley’s ( 1982 ) conceptualization, measuring employees’ thoughts and intentions regarding leaving their current organization. Sample items included “Since joining this company, I have considered seeking other employment” and “I plan to look for another job within the next year.” The scale showed good internal consistency with alpha coefficients of 0.84 for Generation Z and 0.89 for non-Generation Z. 3.4 Data Analysis Strategy The data analysis strategy employed a multi-stage approach, beginning with preliminary analyses to assess data quality and distributional properties, followed by measurement model evaluation, and concluding with structural model testing. All analyses were conducted using AMOS 25.0 software, which provides comprehensive capabilities for structural equation modeling and multi-group analysis. Preliminary analyses included examination of missing data patterns, outlier detection, and assessment of normality assumptions. Missing data were handled using full information maximum likelihood estimation, which provides unbiased parameter estimates under the assumption that data are missing at random. Outliers were identified using Mahalanobis distance criteria and examined for potential influence on model results. The measurement model was evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to assess the reliability and validity of the constructs. Model fit was evaluated using multiple indices, including the chi-square test, comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR). Acceptable fit was defined as CFI and TLI values above 0.90, RMSEA values below 0.08, and SRMR values below 0.08. Construct reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients and composite reliability measures, with values above 0.70 considered acceptable. Convergent validity was evaluated using average variance extracted (AVE) measures, with values above 0.50 indicating adequate convergent validity. Discriminant validity was assessed by comparing the square root of AVE for each construct with its correlations with other constructs. The structural model was tested separately for Generation Z and non-Generation Z samples to identify potential differences in the relationships between constructs. Path coefficients, significance levels, and explained variance (R²) were examined for each relationship in the model. Multi-group analysis was conducted to test for significant differences between the two generational groups in the strength and direction of relationships. Mediation effects were tested using the bootstrap method with 5,000 resamples to generate confidence intervals for indirect effects. Significant mediation was indicated when the confidence intervals did not include zero. The analysis examined both specific indirect effects through individual mediators and total indirect effects through all mediating pathways. 4. Results 4.1 Descriptive Statistics and Sample Characteristics The analysis of descriptive statistics provides important insights into the characteristics of both Generation Z and non-Generation Z samples, revealing significant differences in demographic profiles that reflect broader generational trends in the contemporary workforce. These differences have important implications for understanding the context within which turnover intention mechanisms operate across different age cohorts. The Generation Z sample (n = 346) demonstrated several distinctive characteristics that align with existing research on this generational cohort. The gender distribution was relatively balanced, with 52% female and 48% male respondents. However, the marital status distribution revealed a pronounced difference from older generations, with 84% of Generation Z respondents being unmarried compared to only 52% of non-Generation Z employees. This difference reflects both the younger age of Generation Z employees and changing social trends regarding marriage timing and family formation. Educational attainment levels were notably high across both samples, with 65% of Generation Z respondents holding bachelor’s degrees and 20% holding master’s degrees. This finding is consistent with research indicating that Generation Z represents one of the most educated generations in history, with higher rates of college attendance and degree completion compared to previous cohorts at similar ages. Work experience patterns revealed interesting insights into Generation Z career trajectories. Among Generation Z respondents, 35% had 1–3 years of work experience, 34% had 3–5 years, and 21% had more than 5 years of experience. This distribution suggests that the sample captured Generation Z employees across different career stages, from recent graduates to those with several years of professional experience. Income distribution among Generation Z respondents showed that 41% earned between NT $ 30,000–40,000 per month, with 20% earning NT $ 40,000–50,000. Notably, only 12% earned more than NT $ 50,000 per month, reflecting the relatively early career stage of most Generation Z employees. In contrast, 44% of non-Generation Z employees earned more than NT $ 50,000 per month, demonstrating the income progression that typically accompanies career advancement and experience accumulation. Industry distribution revealed that Generation Z employees were well-represented across various sectors, with 20% working in semiconductor industries, 20% in manufacturing, 14% in service industries, and 9% in technology sectors. This diverse industry representation enhances the generalizability of findings across different organizational contexts and work environments. The non-Generation Z sample (n = 103) presented a contrasting demographic profile that reflects the characteristics of more established career professionals. The gender distribution was similar to Generation Z, with 54% female and 46% male respondents. However, significant differences emerged in family status, with 48% being married and 38% having children, compared to only 16% married and 6% with children among Generation Z respondents. Work experience patterns for non-Generation Z employees showed a concentration in higher experience categories, with 95% having more than 5 years of professional experience. This distribution reflects the sample’s inclusion of Generation X and Baby Boomer employees who have had longer tenure in the workforce and have progressed further in their careers. 4.2 Reliability and Validity Analysis The measurement model evaluation revealed strong psychometric properties for all constructs across both generational samples, providing confidence in the reliability and validity of the measurement instruments. Confirmatory factor analysis results indicated acceptable to excellent model fit, with all constructs demonstrating adequate convergent and discriminant validity. Reliability analysis using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients showed consistently strong internal consistency across all measures. For the Generation Z sample, alpha coefficients ranged from 0.81 (work values) to 0.93 (ability utilization), with most constructs exceeding the 0.90 threshold for excellent reliability. The non-Generation Z sample demonstrated similarly strong reliability, with alpha coefficients ranging from 0.76 (work values) to 0.96 (social identity). Composite reliability measures further confirmed the internal consistency of the constructs, with all values exceeding the recommended threshold of 0.70. Average variance extracted (AVE) values ranged from 0.54 to 0.90 across constructs and samples, with most exceeding the recommended threshold of 0.50 for adequate convergent validity. Discriminant validity was assessed by comparing the square root of AVE for each construct with its correlations with other constructs. The results indicated that all constructs demonstrated adequate discriminant validity, with the square root of AVE exceeding the highest correlation with other constructs in most cases. The correlation matrix revealed several interesting patterns that provide preliminary insights into the relationships between constructs. For Generation Z employees, the strongest correlations were observed between ability utilization and development opportunities (r = 0.86), ability utilization and work-life quality (r = 0.82), and salary level and job satisfaction (r = 0.85). These strong correlations suggest important relationships between these constructs while remaining below the threshold that would indicate multicollinearity concerns. For non-Generation Z employees, the correlation patterns differed somewhat, with the strongest correlations observed between ability utilization and development opportunities (r = 0.87), corporate online reputation and development opportunities (r = 0.89), and salary level and job satisfaction (r = 0.82). These differences in correlation patterns provide early evidence of potential generational differences in the relationships between constructs. 4.3 Hypothesis Testing Results for Generation Z The structural equation modeling results for Generation Z employees revealed a complex pattern of relationships between antecedent factors and turnover intention, with significant variations in the strength and direction of effects across different pathways. The overall model demonstrated good fit to the data and explained substantial variance in the mediating and outcome variables. The model explained 65.5% of the variance in social identity, 32.0% of the variance in work values, 51.1% of the variance in job satisfaction, and 30.0% of the variance in turnover intention among Generation Z employees. These R² values indicate that the proposed model captures a substantial portion of the systematic variance in these important workplace attitudes and intentions. Examining the relationships between organizational factors and mediating variables, corporate online reputation emerged as a significant positive predictor of social identity (β = 0.349, p < 0.01), supporting the hypothesis that Generation Z employees’ organizational identification is strongly influenced by their perceptions of their employer’s digital and online reputation. This finding is particularly noteworthy given Generation Z’s status as digital natives who rely heavily on online information sources for forming opinions about organizations. Development opportunities showed a significant negative relationship with social identity (β = -0.122, p < 0.10), contrary to the hypothesized positive relationship. This unexpected finding suggests that Generation Z employees’ perceptions of development opportunities may not translate directly into stronger organizational identification, possibly reflecting their instrumental approach to career development and willingness to pursue opportunities across organizational boundaries. For work values, corporate online reputation demonstrated a significant positive effect (β = 0.232, p < 0.01), indicating that Generation Z employees’ work-related values are influenced by their perceptions of organizational reputation. Development opportunities showed no significant relationship with work values (β = -0.077, p > 0.10), suggesting that the availability of growth opportunities may not directly shape Generation Z employees’ fundamental work values. Individual factors showed important relationships with both mediating variables. Ability utilization significantly predicted both social identity (β = 0.178, p < 0.01) and work values (β = 0.162, p < 0.10), indicating that Generation Z employees’ sense of organizational belonging and work-related values are enhanced when they feel able to fully utilize their skills and capabilities in their roles. Work-life quality emerged as a significant predictor of both social identity (β = 0.128, p < 0.05) and work values (β = 0.292, p < 0.01), with a particularly strong effect on work values. This finding underscores the importance of work-life balance and quality for Generation Z employees, who often prioritize flexibility and personal fulfillment alongside professional achievement. Economic factors showed mixed results in their relationships with mediating variables. Salary level significantly predicted social identity (β = 0.414, p 0.10). This pattern suggests that while compensation levels influence Generation Z employees’ organizational identification, they may not fundamentally alter their work-related values and priorities. Inflation perception showed no significant relationship with social identity (β = -0.037, p > 0.10) but significantly predicted work values (β = 0.263, p < 0.01). This finding indicates that Generation Z employees’ concerns about economic conditions and purchasing power may influence their work-related priorities and expectations without necessarily affecting their organizational identification. The relationships between mediating variables and turnover intention revealed the expected patterns. Social identity significantly predicted job satisfaction (β = 0.595, p < 0.01), while work values also showed a significant positive relationship with job satisfaction (β = 0.219, p < 0.05). Job satisfaction, in turn, demonstrated a strong negative relationship with turnover intention (β = -0.560, p < 0.01), confirming the central role of job satisfaction in the turnover process as proposed by Mobley’s model. 4.4 Hypothesis Testing Results for Non-Generation Z The structural equation modeling results for non-Generation Z employees revealed both similarities and important differences compared to the Generation Z sample, providing insights into generational variations in the mechanisms underlying turnover intention. The overall model fit was acceptable, and the explained variance in key variables was substantial, though with some variations from the Generation Z results. The model explained 65.1% of the variance in social identity, 35.0% of the variance in work values, 18.1% of the variance in job satisfaction, and 34.6% of the variance in turnover intention among non-Generation Z employees. While the explained variance in social identity and work values was similar to Generation Z, the lower explained variance in job satisfaction suggests that additional factors not captured in the model may be important for understanding job satisfaction among older employees. Organizational factors showed different patterns of relationships compared to Generation Z employees. Corporate online reputation remained a significant predictor of social identity (β = 0.343, p < 0.01), though the effect size was similar to Generation Z. However, corporate online reputation showed a stronger relationship with work values for non-Generation Z employees (β = 0.477, p < 0.01) compared to Generation Z, suggesting that organizational reputation may have broader implications for older employees’ work-related attitudes. Development opportunities showed a significant negative relationship with social identity (β = -0.168, p < 0.10) for non-Generation Z employees, similar to the Generation Z pattern but with a slightly larger effect size. This finding suggests that the unexpected negative relationship between development opportunities and social identity may not be unique to Generation Z but may reflect broader changes in how employees across generations view the relationship between career development and organizational commitment. Individual factors demonstrated important generational differences in their effects on mediating variables. Ability utilization showed a stronger positive relationship with social identity for non-Generation Z employees (β = 0.268, p 0.10). This pattern suggests that the ability to utilize skills and talents may be more important for organizational identification among older employees, while having less impact on their fundamental work values. Work-life quality showed the strongest relationship with social identity among non-Generation Z employees (β = 0.565, p 0.10) for older employees, contrasting sharply with the strong positive relationship observed for Generation Z. This difference suggests that while work-life quality is important for organizational identification across generations, it may be more fundamental to Generation Z employees’ work-related values and priorities. Economic factors showed notably different patterns for non-Generation Z employees compared to Generation Z. Salary level demonstrated a significant negative relationship with social identity (β = -0.214, p < 0.05), contrary to the positive relationship observed for Generation Z. This unexpected finding may reflect different expectations and priorities regarding compensation among older employees, who may view high salaries as potentially indicating organizational instability or unsustainable practices. Inflation perception showed a significant negative relationship with social identity (β = -0.243, p < 0.01) for non-Generation Z employees, contrasting with the non-significant relationship observed for Generation Z. This finding suggests that older employees may be more sensitive to economic uncertainty and its implications for organizational stability and long-term viability. The relationships between mediating variables and outcomes showed similar patterns to Generation Z, with social identity significantly predicting job satisfaction (β = 0.301, p < 0.05) and work values also showing a significant positive relationship (β = 0.227, p < 0.05). Job satisfaction maintained its strong negative relationship with turnover intention (β = -0.588, p < 0.01), confirming the universal importance of job satisfaction in the turnover process across generational cohorts. 5. Discussion 5.1 Key Findings and Theoretical Implications The results of this study provide compelling evidence for significant generational differences in the mechanisms underlying turnover intention, with important implications for both theoretical understanding and practical application of retention strategies. The findings extend existing knowledge by demonstrating that while Mobley’s turnover model provides a robust framework for understanding turnover processes, the specific pathways and relative importance of various factors differ substantially between Generation Z and non-Generation Z employees. One of the most striking findings concerns the role of corporate online reputation in shaping employee attitudes and behaviors. For both generational cohorts, corporate online reputation emerged as a significant predictor of social identity, confirming the growing importance of organizational reputation in the digital age. However, the mechanisms through which reputation influences employee outcomes differ between generations. For Generation Z employees, corporate online reputation primarily affects organizational identification, while for non-Generation Z employees, it has broader implications for both social identity and work values. This difference reflects the unique relationship that Generation Z has with digital information and online platforms. As digital natives, Generation Z employees have grown up in an environment where online reputation and social media presence are integral to identity formation and decision-making processes. Their comfort with digital platforms and reliance on online information sources makes corporate online reputation a particularly salient factor in their organizational evaluations. However, their instrumental approach to career development may limit the extent to which organizational reputation influences their fundamental work values, which appear to be more stable and internally driven. The unexpected negative relationship between development opportunities and social identity across both generational cohorts represents one of the most intriguing findings of this study. This result challenges conventional wisdom about the relationship between career development opportunities and organizational commitment, suggesting that contemporary employees may view development opportunities more instrumentally than previous research has assumed. Several theoretical explanations may account for this finding. First, the concept of boundaryless careers, as described by Briscoe and Hall ( 2006 ), suggests that contemporary employees increasingly view career development as a personal responsibility that transcends organizational boundaries. From this perspective, development opportunities provided by organizations may be valued for their immediate benefits rather than as indicators of organizational investment that warrant reciprocal commitment. Second, the finding may reflect changing expectations about the employment relationship, particularly among younger employees who have witnessed economic uncertainty and organizational restructuring throughout their formative years. These employees may view development opportunities as standard organizational offerings rather than special investments that create obligations for long-term commitment. The differential effects of work-life quality across generational cohorts provide important insights into changing workplace priorities and values. For Generation Z employees, work-life quality demonstrated significant positive relationships with both social identity and work values, indicating that this factor is fundamental to their workplace experience and organizational evaluations. The particularly strong relationship with work values suggests that work-life quality is not merely a job attribute that Generation Z employees prefer, but rather a core component of their fundamental beliefs about what work should provide. In contrast, non-Generation Z employees showed a strong relationship between work-life quality and social identity but no significant relationship with work values. This pattern suggests that while older employees also value work-life balance and quality, they may view these factors as organizational benefits rather than fundamental aspects of their work-related value systems. This difference may reflect generational variations in socialization experiences, with Generation Z having grown up in an era where work-life integration was increasingly emphasized and modeled. The role of economic factors in shaping employee attitudes revealed particularly interesting generational differences that have important implications for compensation and benefits strategies. For Generation Z employees, salary level showed a strong positive relationship with social identity but no significant relationship with work values. This pattern suggests that while compensation levels influence Generation Z employees’ organizational identification, they do not fundamentally alter their work-related priorities and values. The positive relationship between salary level and social identity among Generation Z employees may reflect their early career stage and the importance of financial security in establishing independence and achieving life goals. However, the absence of a relationship with work values suggests that Generation Z employees maintain distinct priorities that are not easily altered by compensation levels alone. For non-Generation Z employees, the significant negative relationship between salary level and social identity presents a puzzling finding that warrants careful interpretation. This result may reflect several underlying dynamics, including concerns about organizational sustainability when compensation levels appear excessive, or preferences for other forms of organizational investment such as job security or benefits. Alternatively, this finding may indicate that older employees have more complex relationships with compensation that incorporate considerations of equity, sustainability, and organizational values. The differential effects of inflation perception across generational cohorts provide insights into how economic uncertainty influences employee attitudes and behaviors. Generation Z employees showed no significant relationship between inflation perception and social identity but a strong positive relationship with work values. This pattern suggests that economic concerns may influence Generation Z employees’ work-related priorities without necessarily affecting their organizational commitment. In contrast, non-Generation Z employees demonstrated significant negative relationships between inflation perception and social identity, suggesting that economic uncertainty may undermine their organizational identification and commitment. This difference may reflect generational variations in economic experiences and expectations, with older employees having lived through periods of greater economic stability and therefore being more sensitive to indicators of economic uncertainty. 5.2 Practical Implications for Human Resource Management The findings of this study have significant implications for human resource management practices, particularly in the areas of recruitment, retention, and organizational culture development. The evidence for generational differences in turnover intention mechanisms suggests that organizations must move beyond one-size-fits-all approaches toward more nuanced, generation-specific strategies that address the unique needs and priorities of different employee cohorts. For Generation Z employees, the strong relationship between corporate online reputation and social identity highlights the critical importance of digital reputation management as a retention strategy. Organizations seeking to attract and retain Generation Z talent must invest in building and maintaining positive online presence across multiple platforms, including social media, employer review sites, and professional networks. This investment should encompass not only marketing and public relations activities but also authentic demonstration of organizational values and social responsibility commitments. The emphasis on work-life quality among Generation Z employees suggests that organizations must fundamentally rethink traditional approaches to work design and employee benefits. Rather than viewing work-life balance as an additional perk or benefit, organizations should recognize that work-life quality is a core component of Generation Z employees’ work values and organizational evaluations. This recognition should translate into policies and practices that support flexible work arrangements, mental health and wellness programs, and integration of personal and professional development opportunities. The finding that ability utilization significantly influences both social identity and work values among Generation Z employees underscores the importance of job design and role clarity in retention strategies. Organizations should ensure that Generation Z employees have opportunities to apply their skills and talents fully, with particular attention to leveraging their technological fluency and innovative thinking capabilities. This may require restructuring traditional job roles and hierarchies to provide more autonomy and creative freedom for younger employees. For non-Generation Z employees, the stronger relationship between work-life quality and social identity, combined with the absence of a relationship with work values, suggests that work-life balance initiatives should be positioned as organizational benefits that demonstrate care and support for employees rather than fundamental changes to work philosophy. This positioning may resonate more effectively with older employees who may have different expectations about the boundaries between work and personal life. The complex relationship between salary level and employee attitudes across generational cohorts suggests that compensation strategies must be carefully calibrated to address different generational priorities and concerns. For Generation Z employees, competitive compensation levels may be important for organizational identification and commitment, but organizations should not assume that higher salaries alone will address retention challenges. Instead, compensation should be combined with other factors that address Generation Z priorities, such as development opportunities, work-life quality, and organizational purpose. For non-Generation Z employees, the negative relationship between salary level and social identity suggests that compensation strategies should emphasize fairness, sustainability, and alignment with organizational values rather than simply maximizing salary levels. Organizations may find that older employees respond more positively to comprehensive benefits packages, job security measures, and recognition programs that acknowledge their experience and contributions. The differential effects of inflation perception across generational cohorts suggest that economic communication strategies should be tailored to address different generational concerns and priorities. For Generation Z employees, organizations should focus on how economic conditions may affect career development opportunities and work-related priorities, while for older employees, communication should address organizational stability and long-term viability in uncertain economic conditions. Organizations should also recognize that the mediating role of social identity, work values, and job satisfaction in the turnover process provides multiple intervention points for retention strategies. Rather than focusing solely on addressing turnover intention directly, organizations can develop comprehensive approaches that strengthen organizational identification, align with employee work values, and enhance job satisfaction through multiple pathways. The evidence for generational differences in these mediating relationships suggests that organizations should develop differentiated approaches to building social identity and enhancing job satisfaction. For Generation Z employees, social identity may be strengthened through authentic demonstration of organizational values, investment in digital reputation, and provision of meaningful work opportunities. For older employees, social identity may be enhanced through recognition of experience and expertise, provision of stable and supportive work environments, and demonstration of organizational commitment to employee welfare. 5.3 Limitations and Future Research Directions While this study provides valuable insights into generational differences in turnover intention mechanisms, several limitations should be acknowledged that provide opportunities for future research. The cross-sectional design limits the ability to make causal inferences about the relationships between variables, and longitudinal research would provide stronger evidence for the proposed causal pathways. Future studies should consider following employees over time to examine how the relationships between organizational factors, mediating variables, and turnover intention evolve as employees gain experience and progress in their careers. The sample composition, while adequate for the research objectives, may limit the generalizability of findings across different cultural and organizational contexts. The study was conducted primarily in Taiwan, and cultural factors may influence the relationships between variables in ways that differ from other national contexts. Future research should examine these relationships across different cultural settings to assess the universality of the observed generational differences. The measurement of generational cohorts using birth year cutoffs, while consistent with established practice, may not fully capture the complexity of generational identity and experience. Future research might consider alternative approaches to defining generational membership, such as shared experiences or value orientations, that may provide more nuanced understanding of generational differences in workplace behavior. 6. Conclusion 6.1 Summary of Findings This study has provided comprehensive empirical evidence for significant generational differences in the mechanisms underlying turnover intention, contributing to both theoretical understanding and practical knowledge in the field of human resource management. Through the application of Mobley’s turnover model to a comparative analysis of Generation Z and non-Generation Z employees, the research has revealed nuanced patterns of relationships between organizational, individual, and economic factors and turnover intention that vary substantially across generational cohorts. The most significant finding concerns the differential role of corporate online reputation in shaping employee attitudes and behaviors across generations. While corporate online reputation emerged as a significant predictor of social identity for both generational cohorts, its broader implications for work values were more pronounced among non-Generation Z employees. This finding reflects the unique relationship that Generation Z has with digital information and online platforms, where organizational reputation serves as a key factor in organizational identification but does not fundamentally alter their work-related value systems, which appear to be more internally driven and stable. The unexpected negative relationship between development opportunities and social identity across both generational cohorts represents a paradigm-shifting finding that challenges conventional assumptions about the relationship between career development and organizational commitment. This result suggests that contemporary employees, regardless of generation, may view development opportunities more instrumentally than previous research has assumed, reflecting the emergence of boundaryless career orientations and changing expectations about the employment relationship. The differential effects of work-life quality across generational cohorts provide crucial insights into evolving workplace priorities and values. For Generation Z employees, work-life quality demonstrated fundamental importance, influencing both organizational identification and core work values. This pattern indicates that work-life integration is not merely a preferred job attribute for Generation Z but rather a core component of their workplace philosophy and organizational evaluations. In contrast, non-Generation Z employees showed strong relationships between work-life quality and organizational identification but no significant impact on work values, suggesting that older employees view work-life balance as an important organizational benefit rather than a fundamental aspect of their work-related value systems. The complex relationships between economic factors and employee attitudes revealed particularly interesting generational variations with important implications for compensation strategies. Generation Z employees demonstrated positive relationships between salary level and organizational identification but no significant impact on work values, suggesting that while compensation influences their organizational commitment, it does not fundamentally alter their work-related priorities. The contrasting negative relationship between salary level and social identity among non-Generation Z employees presents a counterintuitive finding that may reflect concerns about organizational sustainability or preferences for other forms of organizational investment. The role of inflation perception in shaping employee attitudes also varied significantly across generations, with Generation Z employees showing strong relationships between economic concerns and work values but no impact on organizational identification. Non-Generation Z employees demonstrated the opposite pattern, with inflation perception negatively affecting organizational identification but not influencing work values. These differences suggest that economic uncertainty affects different aspects of the employment relationship depending on generational perspectives and experiences. The mediating role of social identity, work values, and job satisfaction in the turnover process was confirmed across both generational cohorts, validating the core propositions of Mobley’s turnover model while revealing important variations in the antecedents of these mediating variables. The consistent strong negative relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intention across generations confirms the universal importance of job satisfaction in retention decisions, while the differential pathways to job satisfaction highlight the need for generation-specific approaches to enhancing employee satisfaction and commitment. 6.2 Theoretical Contributions and Implications This research makes several important theoretical contributions to the literature on turnover intention, generational differences, and organizational behavior. First, it extends Mobley’s turnover model by demonstrating how generational factors moderate the relationships between various antecedents and turnover intention, providing a more nuanced understanding of the conditions under which different factors influence employee retention decisions. The finding that the same theoretical model can produce different patterns of relationships across generational cohorts highlights the importance of considering demographic factors as boundary conditions for established theoretical relationships. Second, the study contributes to generational theory by providing empirical evidence for specific mechanisms through which generational differences manifest in workplace behavior. Rather than relying on broad generalizations about generational characteristics, this research identifies specific pathways through which generational membership influences the evaluation of organizational factors and the formation of workplace attitudes. The differential effects of corporate online reputation, work-life quality, and economic factors across generations provide concrete evidence for the theoretical proposition that generational experiences shape workplace priorities and decision-making processes. Third, the research advances understanding of the role of digital and online factors in contemporary employment relationships. The significant effects of corporate online reputation across both generations, with particularly strong implications for Generation Z employees, highlight the growing importance of digital reputation management in human resource practices. This finding extends existing research on employer branding and organizational attractiveness by demonstrating the specific mechanisms through which online reputation influences employee attitudes and behaviors. Fourth, the unexpected negative relationship between development opportunities and social identity across both generations challenges existing theoretical assumptions about the relationship between career development and organizational commitment. This finding suggests that established theories about the psychological contract and organizational commitment may need to be revised to reflect changing employee expectations and career orientations in the contemporary workplace. The study also contributes to social identity theory by demonstrating how different factors contribute to organizational identification across generational cohorts. The finding that work-life quality has stronger effects on social identity among non-Generation Z employees, while corporate online reputation and ability utilization are more important for Generation Z, suggests that the sources of organizational identification may be generation-specific and require tailored approaches to foster employee commitment. 6.3 Practical Implications for Organizations The findings of this study have profound implications for organizational practice, particularly in the areas of human resource management, organizational culture development, and retention strategy design. Organizations operating in contemporary labor markets must recognize that traditional, one-size-fits-all approaches to employee management are increasingly inadequate for addressing the diverse needs and expectations of multigenerational workforces. For Generation Z employees, organizations must prioritize digital reputation management as a core component of their talent attraction and retention strategies. This involves not only maintaining positive online presence across multiple platforms but also ensuring authentic demonstration of organizational values and social responsibility commitments. Organizations should invest in comprehensive digital reputation monitoring and management systems that track and respond to online discussions about their employer brand and workplace culture. The fundamental importance of work-life quality for Generation Z employees requires organizations to rethink traditional approaches to work design and employee benefits. Rather than treating work-life balance as an additional perk, organizations should integrate flexibility and work-life integration into their core value propositions and operational practices. This may require significant changes to traditional work arrangements, including flexible scheduling, remote work options, and policies that support personal and professional integration. The strong relationship between ability utilization and both social identity and work values among Generation Z employees underscores the importance of job design and role clarity in retention strategies. Organizations should ensure that Generation Z employees have meaningful opportunities to apply their skills and talents, with particular attention to leveraging their technological fluency and innovative thinking capabilities. This may require restructuring traditional hierarchies and job roles to provide greater autonomy and creative freedom. For non-Generation Z employees, the stronger relationship between work-life quality and social identity, combined with the absence of effects on work values, suggests that work-life balance initiatives should be positioned as organizational benefits that demonstrate care and support rather than fundamental changes to work philosophy. Organizations should emphasize how these initiatives reflect organizational commitment to employee welfare and long-term sustainability. The complex relationships between compensation and employee attitudes across generations require sophisticated approaches to compensation strategy design. Organizations should recognize that competitive salary levels may be important for Generation Z organizational identification but should not assume that higher compensation alone will address retention challenges. Instead, compensation should be integrated with other factors that address Generation Z priorities, including development opportunities, work-life quality, and organizational purpose. For non-Generation Z employees, compensation strategies should emphasize fairness, sustainability, and alignment with organizational values rather than simply maximizing salary levels. Organizations may find that comprehensive benefits packages, job security measures, and recognition programs that acknowledge experience and contributions are more effective than pure salary increases. Organizations should also develop differentiated communication strategies that address generational differences in economic concerns and priorities. For Generation Z employees, communication should focus on how economic conditions may affect career development opportunities and work-related priorities, while for older employees, communication should address organizational stability and long-term viability in uncertain economic conditions. 6.4 Limitations and Future Research Directions While this study provides valuable insights into generational differences in turnover intention mechanisms, several limitations should be acknowledged that provide opportunities for future research. The cross-sectional design limits the ability to make causal inferences about the relationships between variables, and longitudinal research would provide stronger evidence for the proposed causal pathways. Future studies should consider following employees over time to examine how the relationships between organizational factors, mediating variables, and turnover intention evolve as employees gain experience and progress in their careers. The sample composition, while adequate for the research objectives, may limit the generalizability of findings across different cultural and organizational contexts. The study was conducted primarily in Taiwan, and cultural factors may influence the relationships between variables in ways that differ from other national contexts. Future research should examine these relationships across different cultural settings to assess the universality of the observed generational differences. The measurement of generational cohorts using birth year cutoffs, while consistent with established practice, may not fully capture the complexity of generational identity and experience. Future research might consider alternative approaches to defining generational membership, such as shared experiences or value orientations, that may provide more nuanced understanding of generational differences in workplace behavior. The study focused on a limited set of organizational, individual, and economic factors, and future research should explore additional variables that may influence turnover intention across generations. Factors such as organizational culture, leadership styles, team dynamics, and industry characteristics may provide additional insights into the mechanisms underlying generational differences in turnover intention. The unexpected negative relationship between development opportunities and social identity warrants further investigation to understand the underlying mechanisms and boundary conditions for this relationship. Future research should explore whether this finding reflects changing expectations about career development, instrumental approaches to skill acquisition, or other factors that may influence how employees interpret and respond to development opportunities. Future research should also examine the long-term implications of generational differences in turnover intention mechanisms. As Generation Z employees gain experience and progress in their careers, their priorities and attitudes may evolve in ways that affect the relationships observed in this study. Longitudinal research tracking generational cohorts over time would provide valuable insights into the stability and evolution of these patterns. The study’s focus on turnover intention, while theoretically justified, should be complemented by research examining actual turnover behavior and its consequences for organizations. Future studies should investigate whether the generational differences in turnover intention mechanisms translate into differential patterns of actual turnover and whether these differences have implications for organizational performance and competitiveness. Finally, future research should explore the implications of generational differences for other important organizational outcomes, such as employee engagement, performance, innovation, and organizational citizenship behavior. Understanding how generational factors influence these outcomes would provide a more comprehensive picture of the implications of workforce demographic changes for organizational effectiveness and success. Declarations Ethical Approval and Consent to Participate This study was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of academic research. Participation in the survey was entirely voluntary and anonymous. All participants were informed of the research purpose and provided their consent prior to completing the questionnaire. Ethical approval for this research was obtained from the institutional review board of the authors’ affiliated university. Consent for Publication Not applicable. Funding This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Author Contribution M.-C.W. conceptualized and designed the research framework, formulated the hypotheses, and supervised the overall study. Y.-H.C. collected and analyzed the data, performed the statistical tests, and contributed to the interpretation of results. Both authors contributed equally to the writing, review, and final approval of the manuscript. References Barhate, B., & Dirani, K. M. (2022). Career aspirations of generation Z: A systematic literature review. European Journal of Training and Development, 46(1/2), 139–157. Briscoe, J. P., & Hall, D. T. (2006). The interplay of boundaryless and protean careers: Combinations and implications. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69(1), 4–18. Cengiz, D., Dube, A., Lindner, A., & Zipperer, B. (2019). The effect of minimum wages on low-wage jobs. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 134(3), 1405–1454. Climek, M., Gajek, L., Krumay, B., & Fertsch, M. (2024). Employee turnover antecedents across different generations: An integrative literature review. Management Review Quarterly, 74(1), 245–284. Dalton, D. R. (1997). Organizational behavior and management. South-Western College Publishing. Deci, E. L., & Moller, A. C. (2005). The concept of competence: A starting place for understanding intrinsic motivation and self-determined extrinsic motivation. Handbook of Competence and Motivation, 579–597. Dutton, J. E., Dukerich, J. M., & Harquail, C. V. (1994). Organizational images and member identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(2), 239–263. Eisner, S. P. (2005). Managing generation Y. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 70(4), 4–15. England, G. W. (1975). The manager and his values: An international perspective from the United States, Japan, Korea, India, and Australia. Ballinger Publishing Company. Finkelstein, L. M., Costanza, D. P., & Goodwin, G. F. (2015). Do your high potentials have potential? The impact of individual differences and designation on leader success. Personnel Psychology, 68(1), 187–214. Gabriel, A. S., Campbell, J. T., Djurdjevic, E., Johnson, R. E., & Rosen, C. C. (2020). Fuzzy profiles: Comparing and contrasting latent profile analysis and fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis for person-centered research. Organizational Research Methods, 23(4), 663–684. Geck, C. (2006). The generation Z connection: Teaching information literacy to the newest net generation. Teacher Librarian, 33(3), 19–23. Greening, D. W., & Turban, D. B. (2000). Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce. Business & Society, 39(3), 254–280. Guest, D. E. (2004). The psychology of the employment relationship: An analysis based on the psychological contract. Applied Psychology, 53(4), 541–555. Gyurák Babeľová, Z., Stareček, A., Koltnerová, K., & Cagáňová, D. (2020). Perceived organizational support for creativity, responsible leadership and organizational pride in lecturers from private and public universities. Sustainability, 12(10), 4061. Hammond, M. S., Locklear, T. S., & Borman, W. C. (2010). The development of a comprehensive measure of work values. Poster presented at the 25th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Atlanta, GA. Hansford, B. (2002). Work-life balance: A guide for HR in achieving organisational and individual change. Butterworth-Heinemann. Henne, D., & Locke, E. A. (1985). Job dissatisfaction: What are the consequences? International Journal of Psychology, 20(2), 221–240. Kalleberg, A. L. (1977). Work values and job rewards: A theory of job satisfaction. American Sociological Review, 42(1), 124–143. Kirschenbaum, A., & Weisberg, J. (2002). Employee’s turnover intentions and job destination choices. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(1), 109–125. Kuzior, A., Kwilinski, A., & Tkachenko, V. (2022). Sustainable development of organizations based on the combinatorial model of artificial intelligence. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 7(2), 1353–1376. Locke, E. A., & Henne, D. (1985). Work motivation theories. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 1–35. Mael, F., & Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(2), 103–123. Mannheim, K. (1952). The problem of generations. Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge, 24, 276–322. Mobley, W. H. (1982). Employee turnover: Causes, consequences, and control. Addison-Wesley. Mobley, W. H., Horner, S. O., & Hollingsworth, A. T. (1978). An evaluation of precursors of hospital employee turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63(4), 408–414. Pollák, F., Vodák, J., Soviar, J., Markovič, P., Lentini, G., Mazzeschi, V., & Luè, A. (2021). Promotion of electric mobility in the European Union—Overview of project PROMETEUS. Transportation Research Procedia, 55, 30–37. Price, J. L. (1977). The study of turnover. Iowa State University Press. Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. Free Press. Rousseau, D. M. (1998). The ‘problem’ of the psychological contract considered. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(S1), 665–671. Schroer, W. J. (2013). Generations X, Y, Z and the others. The Portal, 40(4), 9–16. Super, D. E. (1970). Work Values Inventory. Houghton Mifflin. Van Knippenberg, D., & Van Schie, E. C. (2000). Foci and correlates of organizational identification. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73(2), 137–147. Zhang, M., & Huangfu, S. (2018). Inflation and real wage dispersion in a frictional labor market. Economics Letters, 162, 51–54. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7862963","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":541006617,"identity":"4fe08cb9-53a7-43d6-be41-235b81869fa8","order_by":0,"name":"Yi-Wen Liao","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"National Kaohsiung University of Science and Technology","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Yi-Wen","middleName":"","lastName":"Liao","suffix":""},{"id":541006618,"identity":"4867e6ce-ec00-4e7d-94f0-465ef2a0293a","order_by":1,"name":"Hao-Chiang Koong Lin","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"National University of Tainan","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hao-Chiang","middleName":"Koong","lastName":"Lin","suffix":""},{"id":541006619,"identity":"4af14950-e1f8-4918-991f-a7e10120d6f9","order_by":2,"name":"MengChuan Wu","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"National Pingtung University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"MengChuan","middleName":"","lastName":"Wu","suffix":""},{"id":541006620,"identity":"9ac19b6d-9fac-430c-ba40-8d85d8f9721d","order_by":3,"name":"Yong-Cih Yang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"National Taiwan University of Science and Technology","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Yong-Cih","middleName":"","lastName":"Yang","suffix":""},{"id":541006621,"identity":"0f8b28a2-d29e-4a31-9e72-a1e5fda607bb","order_by":4,"name":"Yu-Ho Chen","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"National Kaohsiung University of Science and Technology","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Yu-Ho","middleName":"","lastName":"Chen","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-10-15 02:53:14","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7862963/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7862963/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":95801877,"identity":"b63ec9dc-b742-4bfa-b78d-126b222f07ca","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-13 08:26:23","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":59820,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"JOBmanuscript.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7862963/v1/549ba7b7f41abffcd70137e0.docx"},{"id":95752758,"identity":"6e4340e6-f434-4b03-bcff-ff866f3cc462","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-12 16:06:46","extension":"json","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":7266,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"3e7298656a844f06bdb77fedf6208ea6.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7862963/v1/6c28b88d6d9dc43f47ff14de.json"},{"id":95752755,"identity":"946deb1c-1b08-4103-b7ea-aa2ae07ac487","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-12 16:06:46","extension":"xml","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":135395,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"3e7298656a844f06bdb77fedf6208ea61enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7862963/v1/f0574bb0bc16dd338fa78b1a.xml"},{"id":95752757,"identity":"ef0d3142-0cba-499f-aea5-c1fee037cafc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-12 16:06:46","extension":"xml","order_by":3,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":135279,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"3e7298656a844f06bdb77fedf6208ea61structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7862963/v1/72ab85de604e5a10c1be0d67.xml"},{"id":95752759,"identity":"26ae69e1-03e4-4310-9af6-21fbd500a5c2","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-12 16:06:46","extension":"html","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":141230,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7862963/v1/03b4644296dff9984d134919.html"},{"id":100872922,"identity":"e9ebd253-d5d2-42ae-b4af-50e7b09816ce","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-22 09:42:37","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":975860,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7862963/v1/edcc1cff-de17-4baf-bdc3-43d16228878d.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Generational Differences in Turnover Intention: A Comparative Study of Generation Z and Non-Generation Z Employees Based on Mobley’s Turnover Model","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe contemporary workplace is experiencing an unprecedented demographic transformation as Generation Z, born between 1990 and 2010, increasingly enters the labor market and begins to constitute a significant portion of the global workforce. This generational shift represents more than a simple demographic change; it embodies a fundamental alteration in workplace expectations, values, and behaviors that challenges traditional human resource management paradigms and organizational structures. The implications of this transformation extend far beyond surface-level differences in technology adoption or communication preferences, penetrating deep into the core mechanisms that drive employee engagement, satisfaction, and ultimately, retention decisions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eGeneration Z, having grown up in an era characterized by rapid technological advancement, economic uncertainty, and social media ubiquity, brings to the workplace a unique set of perspectives and expectations that often diverge significantly from those of their predecessors. Unlike previous generations who may have prioritized job security and hierarchical advancement, Generation Z employees demonstrate a pronounced emphasis on purpose-driven work, authentic organizational values, and flexible work arrangements that accommodate their desire for work-life integration rather than mere work-life balance. This shift in priorities has profound implications for organizational turnover patterns, as traditional retention strategies that proved effective for Baby Boomers and Generation X may prove inadequate or even counterproductive when applied to Generation Z employees.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe significance of understanding generational differences in turnover intention cannot be overstated, particularly given the substantial costs associated with employee turnover in contemporary organizations. Research consistently demonstrates that voluntary turnover imposes significant financial burdens on organizations, with estimates suggesting that replacing a single employee can cost between 50% to 200% of their annual salary when accounting for recruitment, training, lost productivity, and knowledge transfer expenses. For Generation Z employees, who statistically demonstrate higher turnover rates and shorter average tenure compared to previous generations at similar career stages, these costs can be particularly pronounced and recurring.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMoreover, the challenge of Generation Z turnover extends beyond immediate financial considerations to encompass broader strategic implications for organizational competitiveness and sustainability. As digital natives who possess inherent technological fluency and innovative thinking capabilities, Generation Z employees often serve as catalysts for organizational transformation and adaptation to rapidly evolving market conditions. The loss of these employees not only represents a direct cost but also constitutes a missed opportunity for organizations to leverage the unique perspectives and capabilities that this generation brings to the workplace.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe theoretical foundation for understanding turnover intention has been significantly advanced by Mobley\u0026rsquo;s turnover model, which provides a comprehensive framework for examining the complex psychological and behavioral processes that precede actual turnover decisions. Mobley\u0026rsquo;s model posits that turnover intention is not a spontaneous decision but rather the culmination of a sequential process involving job dissatisfaction, thoughts of quitting, evaluation of alternative opportunities, and ultimately, the intention to leave. This model has proven particularly valuable in organizational research due to its ability to capture the nuanced interplay between individual characteristics, organizational factors, and environmental conditions that collectively influence employee retention decisions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHowever, while Mobley\u0026rsquo;s model has demonstrated robust explanatory power across various organizational contexts and demographic groups, its application to generational differences in turnover intention remains relatively underexplored. The unique characteristics and values of Generation Z suggest that the traditional pathways described in Mobley\u0026rsquo;s model may manifest differently for this cohort compared to older generations. For instance, Generation Z\u0026rsquo;s heightened sensitivity to organizational authenticity and social responsibility may amplify the importance of corporate reputation in the turnover decision process, while their preference for rapid feedback and career advancement may alter the relative significance of development opportunities and ability utilization.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study addresses these gaps in the literature by conducting a comprehensive comparative analysis of turnover intention mechanisms between Generation Z and non-Generation Z employees, utilizing Mobley\u0026rsquo;s turnover model as the theoretical foundation while incorporating contemporary factors that reflect the evolving nature of work and organizational relationships. The research examines how organizational factors such as corporate online reputation and development opportunities, individual factors including ability utilization and work-life quality, and economic factors such as salary levels and inflation perception differentially influence turnover intention across generational cohorts.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe investigation is particularly timely given the current labor market dynamics, where organizations worldwide are grappling with talent shortages, increased competition for skilled workers, and the need to adapt their human resource practices to accommodate multigenerational workforces. The COVID-19 pandemic has further accelerated these trends, with many organizations experiencing what has been termed the \u0026ldquo;Great Resignation,\u0026rdquo; characterized by unprecedented levels of voluntary turnover across industries and demographic groups. Understanding the specific factors that drive turnover intention among different generational cohorts is therefore not merely an academic exercise but a practical imperative for organizational survival and success.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe research contributes to the existing literature in several important ways. First, it provides empirical evidence of the differential mechanisms underlying turnover intention across generational cohorts, thereby extending the theoretical understanding of how demographic factors moderate the relationships described in established turnover models. Second, it offers practical insights for human resource professionals and organizational leaders seeking to develop more effective, generation-specific retention strategies. Third, it advances methodological approaches to studying generational differences by employing sophisticated statistical techniques that can capture the complex, multi-level relationships between various antecedents and turnover intention.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, this study addresses the critical need for evidence-based approaches to generational management in organizations. While popular management literature often presents generational differences in broad, sometimes stereotypical terms, this research provides nuanced, empirically grounded insights that can inform more sophisticated and effective organizational practices. By examining the specific pathways through which various factors influence turnover intention for different generational cohorts, the study enables organizations to move beyond one-size-fits-all approaches toward more targeted and effective retention strategies.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe implications of this research extend beyond immediate human resource management applications to encompass broader questions about organizational adaptation and evolution in response to changing workforce demographics. As Generation Z continues to represent an increasing proportion of the workforce, organizations that fail to understand and adapt to their unique characteristics and expectations risk not only higher turnover costs but also reduced competitiveness in talent acquisition and retention. Conversely, organizations that successfully decode the factors driving Generation Z engagement and retention may gain significant competitive advantages in attracting and retaining top talent.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Literature Review","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.1 Mobley\u0026rsquo;s Turnover Model: Theoretical Foundation and Contemporary Applications\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe theoretical understanding of employee turnover has been significantly advanced by Mobley\u0026rsquo;s seminal work on turnover intention, which provides a comprehensive framework for examining the complex psychological and behavioral processes that precede actual turnover decisions (Mobley, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1982\u003c/span\u003e). Mobley\u0026rsquo;s turnover model represents a departure from earlier, more simplistic approaches that viewed turnover as a direct consequence of job dissatisfaction, instead proposing a sequential process that involves multiple cognitive and evaluative stages. This model has become one of the most widely cited and empirically tested frameworks in organizational behavior research, providing valuable insights into the mechanisms underlying employee retention and departure decisions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe foundational premise of Mobley\u0026rsquo;s model is that turnover intention serves as the most proximate predictor of actual turnover behavior, with the model delineating a series of intermediate steps that connect initial job dissatisfaction to ultimate departure decisions (Mobley et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1978\u003c/span\u003e). The model begins with the experience of job dissatisfaction, which triggers thoughts of quitting and initiates a cognitive evaluation process wherein employees assess the costs and benefits of leaving their current position. This evaluation encompasses consideration of alternative employment opportunities, comparison of current and potential job situations, and assessment of the likelihood of finding acceptable alternatives.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSubsequent research has validated many of the core propositions of Mobley\u0026rsquo;s model while also identifying areas for refinement and extension. Price (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1977\u003c/span\u003e) contributed to the theoretical development by emphasizing the role of organizational and environmental factors in shaping turnover decisions, while Dalton (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e) highlighted the importance of distinguishing between avoidable and unavoidable turnover in organizational contexts. These contributions have enriched the theoretical foundation by acknowledging that turnover decisions are influenced not only by individual psychological processes but also by broader organizational and environmental conditions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe application of Mobley\u0026rsquo;s model to contemporary workplace contexts has revealed both its enduring relevance and the need for adaptation to reflect changing organizational realities. Kirschenbaum and Weisberg (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrated that the model\u0026rsquo;s predictive power remains robust across different cultural and organizational contexts, while also noting that the relative importance of various factors may vary depending on labor market conditions and industry characteristics. This finding is particularly relevant for understanding generational differences in turnover intention, as different cohorts may weight various factors differently based on their unique experiences and values.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRecent applications of Mobley\u0026rsquo;s model have incorporated new variables that reflect the evolving nature of work and employment relationships. For instance, Guest (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e) extended the model to include psychological contract considerations, arguing that employees\u0026rsquo; perceptions of mutual obligations between themselves and their employers play a crucial role in turnover decisions. Similarly, Rousseau (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e) emphasized the importance of organizational identification and commitment as mediating factors that influence the relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intention.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe relevance of Mobley\u0026rsquo;s model to generational research is particularly evident in its emphasis on individual differences in the evaluation of job alternatives and the weighting of various job attributes. Generation Z employees, having grown up in an era of rapid technological change and economic uncertainty, may demonstrate different patterns of alternative evaluation compared to older generations. Their comfort with job mobility and their emphasis on purpose-driven work may alter the traditional cost-benefit calculations described in Mobley\u0026rsquo;s model, potentially accelerating the progression from dissatisfaction to turnover intention.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, the model\u0026rsquo;s focus on the role of perceived alternatives in turnover decisions is particularly relevant for understanding Generation Z behavior, as this cohort has demonstrated greater willingness to change jobs and explore alternative career paths compared to previous generations. The proliferation of online job platforms and social media networking has also fundamentally altered the process of alternative evaluation, making information about job opportunities more accessible and potentially accelerating the turnover decision process.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.2 Generational Theory and Workplace Behavior: Understanding Generation Z in Organizational Contexts\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe theoretical foundation for understanding generational differences in workplace behavior draws heavily from Mannheim\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1952\u003c/span\u003e) seminal work on the sociology of generations, which posits that individuals who experience similar historical events during their formative years develop shared values, attitudes, and behavioral patterns that persist throughout their lives. This generational theory has been extensively applied to organizational research, providing a framework for understanding how different age cohorts approach work, career development, and organizational relationships.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eGeneration Z, typically defined as individuals born between 1990 and 2010, represents the first generation to grow up entirely in the digital age, experiencing unprecedented levels of technological integration, social media connectivity, and global awareness from an early age (Geck, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). This unique developmental context has shaped their worldview in ways that distinguish them significantly from previous generations, with implications that extend far beyond surface-level differences in technology adoption or communication preferences.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResearch on Generation Z workplace characteristics has identified several distinctive features that differentiate this cohort from their predecessors. Barhate and Dirani (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) conducted a systematic literature review of Generation Z career aspirations and found that this generation demonstrates a pronounced emphasis on purpose-driven work, seeking employment opportunities that align with their personal values and contribute to broader social good. This finding represents a significant departure from previous generations who may have prioritized job security, compensation, or hierarchical advancement as primary career motivators.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe digital nativity of Generation Z has profound implications for their workplace expectations and behaviors. Unlike previous generations who adapted to digital technologies during their careers, Generation Z employees have never known a world without internet connectivity, social media, and instant access to information (William J. Schroer, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). This technological fluency translates into expectations for seamless digital integration in workplace processes, real-time feedback mechanisms, and flexible work arrangements that accommodate their preference for work-life integration rather than traditional work-life balance.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEisner (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e) identified several key characteristics that distinguish Generation Z from previous cohorts in organizational settings. These include a preference for collaborative work environments, an expectation of rapid career advancement, and a desire for continuous learning and development opportunities. Additionally, Generation Z employees demonstrate heightened sensitivity to organizational authenticity and social responsibility, often evaluating potential employers based on their commitment to environmental sustainability, diversity and inclusion, and ethical business practices.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe implications of these generational characteristics for turnover intention are significant and multifaceted. Kuzior et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) examined the phenomenon of the \u0026ldquo;Great Resignation\u0026rdquo; and found that Generation Z employees were disproportionately represented among those leaving their jobs during the COVID-19 pandemic, citing factors such as lack of purpose, inadequate work-life balance, and misalignment between personal and organizational values as primary motivators for departure.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eClimek et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) conducted an integrative literature review on employee turnover antecedents across different generations and identified both commonalities and unique factors that influence turnover decisions for various age cohorts. While traditional factors such as compensation and job security remain important across all generations, Generation Z employees demonstrate greater sensitivity to factors such as organizational culture, development opportunities, and work flexibility. This finding suggests that traditional retention strategies may be insufficient for effectively managing Generation Z turnover.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe concept of career mobility also differs significantly between Generation Z and older generations. While previous cohorts often viewed job changes as potentially negative signals of instability or lack of commitment, Generation Z employees tend to view career mobility as a positive strategy for skill development, experience accumulation, and personal growth (Finkelstein et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). This fundamental shift in perspective has important implications for how organizations approach retention strategies and career development programs.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResearch by Gabriel et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) on multigenerational workplace dynamics found that Generation Z employees often experience frustration when working under traditional management approaches that emphasize hierarchy and formal authority structures. Instead, they prefer collaborative leadership styles that emphasize mentoring, coaching, and participative decision-making. This preference for different management approaches can significantly influence their job satisfaction and, consequently, their turnover intention.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe social consciousness of Generation Z also represents a significant departure from previous generations\u0026rsquo; workplace priorities. Gyur\u0026aacute;k Babeľov\u0026aacute; et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) found that Generation Z employees place considerable importance on working for organizations that demonstrate genuine commitment to social responsibility and environmental sustainability. This emphasis on organizational values alignment suggests that corporate reputation and social impact may play more prominent roles in Generation Z turnover decisions compared to older generations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.3 Factors Influencing Turnover Intention: A Multi-Dimensional Perspective\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe literature on turnover intention has identified numerous factors that influence employees\u0026rsquo; decisions to leave their organizations, with these factors generally categorized into organizational, individual, and environmental dimensions. Understanding these factors and their relative importance across different generational cohorts is crucial for developing effective retention strategies and predicting turnover patterns in contemporary organizations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOrganizational factors represent one of the most extensively studied categories of turnover antecedents, encompassing elements such as corporate reputation, organizational culture, management practices, and development opportunities. Greening and Turban (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrated that corporate social performance serves as a competitive advantage in attracting and retaining quality workforce, with employees increasingly considering organizational values and social responsibility when making career decisions. This finding is particularly relevant for Generation Z employees, who demonstrate heightened sensitivity to organizational authenticity and social impact.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe concept of corporate online reputation has gained increasing importance in the digital age, as employees and potential candidates rely heavily on internet-based sources for information about organizations. Poll\u0026aacute;k et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) examined the corporate reputation of family-owned businesses and found that online reputation significantly influences employee perceptions and organizational attractiveness. For Generation Z employees, who are digital natives and heavy users of social media and online platforms, corporate online reputation may play an even more prominent role in their organizational evaluations and turnover decisions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDevelopment opportunities represent another critical organizational factor influencing turnover intention. Briscoe and Hall (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e) explored the concept of boundaryless and protean careers, arguing that contemporary employees increasingly seek opportunities for continuous learning and skill development rather than traditional hierarchical advancement. This trend is particularly pronounced among Generation Z employees, who demonstrate strong preferences for organizations that provide clear pathways for professional growth and skill enhancement.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIndividual factors encompass personal characteristics, values, and circumstances that influence turnover decisions. Ability utilization, defined as the extent to which employees can apply their skills and talents in their current roles, has been identified as a significant predictor of job satisfaction and turnover intention (Deci \u0026amp; Moller, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e). For Generation Z employees, who often possess advanced technological skills and innovative thinking capabilities, the opportunity to fully utilize their abilities may be particularly important for retention.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWork-life quality and balance have emerged as increasingly important factors in turnover decisions, particularly among younger generations. The traditional concept of work-life balance, which emphasized clear separation between work and personal life, has evolved into work-life integration, which seeks to create synergy between professional and personal activities (Hansford, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e). Generation Z employees, having grown up in an era of constant connectivity and flexible arrangements, often expect organizations to provide work arrangements that accommodate their desire for flexibility and personal fulfillment.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEconomic factors, including salary levels and inflation perception, continue to play important roles in turnover decisions, although their relative importance may vary across generational cohorts. Cengiz et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) examined the effect of minimum wages on low-wage jobs and found that compensation levels significantly influence employee retention, particularly in competitive labor markets. However, for Generation Z employees, who often prioritize purpose and growth over immediate financial rewards, the relationship between compensation and turnover intention may be more complex than for previous generations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eInflation perception represents a contemporary economic factor that has gained increased attention in recent years. Zhang and Huangfu (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) developed a model of inflation and real wage dispersion in frictional markets, demonstrating how inflation expectations influence employee behavior and job search activities. For Generation Z employees, who have experienced significant economic uncertainty during their formative years, inflation perception may play a particularly important role in their evaluation of job alternatives and turnover decisions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe mediating role of psychological factors such as social identity, work values, and job satisfaction has been extensively documented in turnover research. Social identity theory, as applied to organizational contexts, suggests that employees\u0026rsquo; sense of identification with their organizations significantly influences their commitment and retention (Dutton et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1994\u003c/span\u003e). For Generation Z employees, who often seek authentic connections and meaningful relationships in their work environments, organizational identification may be particularly important for retention.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWork values, representing employees\u0026rsquo; beliefs about what is important and desirable in work situations, serve as important mediators between organizational factors and turnover intention (Kalleberg, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1977\u003c/span\u003e). Research has shown that generational differences in work values can significantly influence how employees respond to various organizational practices and policies. Understanding these differences is crucial for developing effective retention strategies that resonate with different generational cohorts.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.4 Mediating Variables: Social Identity, Work Values, and Job Satisfaction\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe relationship between organizational factors and turnover intention is rarely direct but is typically mediated by psychological and attitudinal variables that reflect employees\u0026rsquo; subjective experiences and evaluations of their work environments. Three particularly important mediating variables that have received extensive attention in turnover research are social identity, work values, and job satisfaction, each of which plays a crucial role in translating objective organizational conditions into subjective employee responses that ultimately influence retention decisions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSocial identity in organizational contexts refers to employees\u0026rsquo; sense of identification with and belonging to their organizations, encompassing both cognitive and emotional components that reflect the extent to which individuals define themselves in terms of their organizational membership (Mael \u0026amp; Ashforth, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1992\u003c/span\u003e). The theoretical foundation for understanding organizational identification draws from social identity theory, which posits that individuals derive part of their self-concept from their membership in social groups, including work organizations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResearch by Van Knippenberg and Van Schie (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e) examined the foci and correlates of organizational identification and found that employees who strongly identify with their organizations demonstrate higher levels of commitment, engagement, and retention. This relationship is particularly important for understanding generational differences in turnover intention, as Generation Z employees may demonstrate different patterns of organizational identification compared to older generations due to their unique values and expectations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe process of organizational identification is influenced by various factors, including organizational prestige, perceived organizational support, and value congruence between individuals and organizations. For Generation Z employees, who demonstrate heightened sensitivity to organizational authenticity and social responsibility, the alignment between personal and organizational values may be particularly important for developing strong organizational identification. Organizations that fail to demonstrate genuine commitment to values that resonate with Generation Z may struggle to foster the level of identification necessary for effective retention.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWork values represent another crucial mediating variable that influences the relationship between organizational factors and turnover intention. Rokeach (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1973\u003c/span\u003e) defined values as enduring beliefs about desirable end states or modes of conduct that guide individual behavior and decision-making. In organizational contexts, work values reflect employees\u0026rsquo; beliefs about what is important and desirable in work situations, serving as criteria for evaluating job alternatives and making career decisions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResearch on generational differences in work values has revealed significant variations across age cohorts, with implications for understanding differential patterns of turnover intention. England (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1975\u003c/span\u003e) conducted cross-cultural research on managerial values and found that work values are shaped by both generational experiences and cultural contexts. For Generation Z employees, who have grown up in an era of rapid technological change and social awareness, work values may emphasize factors such as purpose, flexibility, and social impact more than traditional values such as security and hierarchy.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe measurement and conceptualization of work values have evolved significantly over time, with contemporary research recognizing the multidimensional nature of this construct. Super\u0026rsquo;s work values inventory, as validated by Hammond et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e), identifies multiple dimensions of work values including achievement, autonomy, altruism, and security. Understanding how different generational cohorts prioritize these various dimensions is crucial for developing effective retention strategies.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eJob satisfaction represents perhaps the most extensively studied mediating variable in turnover research, serving as a proximate predictor of turnover intention in numerous theoretical models. Locke and Henne (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1985\u003c/span\u003e) defined job satisfaction as a positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one\u0026rsquo;s job experiences, emphasizing both cognitive and affective components of this construct.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intention has been consistently demonstrated across various organizational contexts and demographic groups, with meta-analytic research confirming the strength and generalizability of this relationship (Henne \u0026amp; Locke, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1985\u003c/span\u003e). However, the factors that contribute to job satisfaction may vary significantly across generational cohorts, with implications for understanding differential patterns of turnover intention.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor Generation Z employees, job satisfaction may be influenced by factors that differ from those important to previous generations. Research suggests that Generation Z employees place greater emphasis on factors such as work flexibility, development opportunities, and organizational culture in their satisfaction evaluations. Traditional factors such as compensation and job security, while still important, may be less central to Generation Z job satisfaction compared to older generations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe interplay between social identity, work values, and job satisfaction creates a complex web of relationships that collectively influence turnover intention. These mediating variables do not operate independently but rather interact with each other in ways that can amplify or attenuate their individual effects. For instance, employees who strongly identify with their organizations may be more likely to experience job satisfaction even when objective working conditions are suboptimal, while those whose work values are misaligned with organizational practices may experience dissatisfaction regardless of other positive factors.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eUnderstanding these mediating relationships is particularly important for developing generation-specific retention strategies. Organizations seeking to retain Generation Z employees must recognize that traditional approaches focused primarily on compensation and job security may be insufficient if they fail to address the underlying psychological needs and values that drive this generation\u0026rsquo;s workplace behavior. Instead, effective retention strategies must consider the complex interplay between organizational factors and mediating variables in shaping Generation Z employees\u0026rsquo; turnover intentions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Methodology","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.1 Research Design and Theoretical Framework\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study employs a quantitative research design utilizing structural equation modeling (SEM) to examine the differential factors influencing turnover intention between Generation Z and non-Generation Z employees. The research design is grounded in Mobley\u0026rsquo;s turnover model, which provides the theoretical foundation for understanding the sequential process leading from job-related factors to turnover intention through various mediating variables. The study adopts a cross-sectional survey approach, collecting data at a single point in time to capture employees\u0026rsquo; perceptions and attitudes across different generational cohorts.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe theoretical framework integrates multiple streams of research, including generational theory, social identity theory, and work values theory, to provide a comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms underlying turnover intention. The model conceptualizes turnover intention as the dependent variable, influenced by three categories of independent variables: organizational factors (corporate online reputation and development opportunities), individual factors (ability utilization and work-life quality), and economic labor market factors (salary level and inflation perception). The relationships between these independent variables and turnover intention are mediated by social identity, work values, and job satisfaction.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe choice of structural equation modeling as the primary analytical approach is justified by its ability to simultaneously examine multiple relationships between latent constructs while accounting for measurement error. SEM is particularly well-suited for testing complex theoretical models that involve mediating relationships, as it allows researchers to assess both the direct and indirect effects of various factors on the outcome variable. This analytical approach enables a more nuanced understanding of the pathways through which different factors influence turnover intention across generational cohorts.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe research design incorporates a comparative approach, examining the proposed relationships separately for Generation Z and non-Generation Z employees to identify potential differences in the mechanisms underlying turnover intention. This comparative framework allows for the identification of generation-specific patterns while also highlighting commonalities across age cohorts. The use of multi-group analysis within the SEM framework enables statistical testing of differences between the two generational groups.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.2 Sample Selection and Data Collection Procedures\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study employed a purposive sampling strategy to recruit participants from various industries and organizational contexts, ensuring adequate representation of both Generation Z and non-Generation Z employees. The sampling frame was designed to capture employees across different sectors, including manufacturing, technology, finance, healthcare, and service industries, to enhance the generalizability of findings across diverse organizational contexts.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants were recruited through multiple channels, including online professional networks, industry associations, and organizational partnerships. The use of multiple recruitment channels was intended to minimize potential selection bias and ensure adequate diversity in the sample composition. Particular attention was paid to achieving sufficient representation of Generation Z employees, who constitute a smaller proportion of the overall workforce compared to older generations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe final sample consisted of 449 respondents, with 346 Generation Z employees (born between 1990\u0026ndash;2010) and 103 non-Generation Z employees (born before 1990). The Generation Z subsample represented 77.1% of the total sample, reflecting both the targeted recruitment strategy and the increasing presence of this generation in the contemporary workforce. The non-Generation Z subsample included employees from Generation X and Baby Boomer cohorts, providing a comparison group that encompasses the experiences and perspectives of older generations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDemographic analysis of the sample revealed several important characteristics. Among Generation Z respondents, 52% were female and 48% were male, with 84% being unmarried and 94% having no children. The majority (65%) held bachelor\u0026rsquo;s degrees, with 20% holding master\u0026rsquo;s degrees. In terms of work experience, 35% had 1\u0026ndash;3 years of experience, 34% had 3\u0026ndash;5 years, and 21% had more than 5 years. The income distribution showed that 41% earned between NT\u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e30,000\u0026ndash;40,000 per month, with 20% earning NT\u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e40,000\u0026ndash;50,000.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe non-Generation Z subsample demonstrated different demographic patterns, with 54% being female and 46% male. Notably, 48% were married compared to only 16% of Generation Z respondents, and 38% had children compared to 6% of Generation Z employees. The education distribution was similar to Generation Z, with 51% holding bachelor\u0026rsquo;s degrees and 23% holding master\u0026rsquo;s degrees. However, the work experience profile differed significantly, with 95% having more than 5 years of experience, reflecting their longer tenure in the workforce.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eData collection was conducted using an online survey platform (Surveycake) over a period of three months. The online format was chosen to accommodate the preferences of Generation Z respondents, who demonstrate high comfort levels with digital platforms, while also providing convenience for older generations. The survey was designed to be completed in approximately 15\u0026ndash;20 minutes to minimize respondent fatigue and maximize completion rates.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.3 Measurement Instruments and Scale Development\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study utilized established measurement scales adapted from previous research to ensure reliability and validity of the constructs. All measures employed five-point Likert scales ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), providing sufficient variance for statistical analysis while maintaining ease of interpretation for respondents.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eCorporate online reputation was measured using a five-item scale adapted from Poll\u0026aacute;k et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), focusing on employees\u0026rsquo; perceptions of their organization\u0026rsquo;s reputation in digital and online contexts. Sample items included \u0026ldquo;I believe my company has a good reputation\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I believe my company has a good online reputation.\u0026rdquo; The scale demonstrated strong internal consistency with Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha coefficients of 0.86 for Generation Z and 0.87 for non-Generation Z samples.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDevelopment opportunities were assessed using a five-item scale based on Briscoe and Hall\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e) work on career development, measuring employees\u0026rsquo; perceptions of growth and advancement opportunities within their organizations. Representative items included \u0026ldquo;I believe the company provides skill training to enhance employees\u0026rsquo; professional development opportunities\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I believe the company encourages employees to continuously learn and improve their professional skills.\u0026rdquo; The scale showed good reliability with alpha coefficients of 0.90 for both generational groups.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAbility utilization was measured using a five-item scale adapted from Deci and Moller (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e), assessing the extent to which employees feel they can apply their skills and talents in their current roles. Sample items included \u0026ldquo;I believe the company provides employees with opportunities to utilize their abilities\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I believe that in my current job, I have the opportunity to fully utilize my abilities.\u0026rdquo; The scale demonstrated excellent reliability with alpha coefficients of 0.93 for Generation Z and 0.86 for non-Generation Z.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWork-life quality was assessed using a five-item scale measuring employees\u0026rsquo; perceptions of balance and quality in their work and personal life integration. Items included \u0026ldquo;I believe my work has clear goals and responsibility allocation\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I believe my work has reasonable working hours and workload.\u0026rdquo; The scale showed good internal consistency with alpha coefficients of 0.86 for Generation Z and 0.88 for non-Generation Z.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eInflation perception was measured using a five-item scale developed specifically for this study, assessing employees\u0026rsquo; awareness and concern about inflationary pressures on their economic well-being. Sample items included \u0026ldquo;I believe the current price level is higher than in the past\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I believe inflation has a significant impact on my personal economic situation.\u0026rdquo; The scale demonstrated acceptable reliability with alpha coefficients of 0.84 for Generation Z and 0.91 for non-Generation Z.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSalary level satisfaction was assessed using a six-item scale measuring employees\u0026rsquo; perceptions of their compensation relative to their expectations and market standards. Items included \u0026ldquo;I am satisfied with my current salary level\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I believe the company\u0026rsquo;s salary system is fair and transparent.\u0026rdquo; The scale showed strong reliability with alpha coefficients of 0.91 for both generational groups.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSocial identity was measured using a five-item scale adapted from Mael and Ashforth (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1992\u003c/span\u003e), assessing employees\u0026rsquo; identification with their organizations and sense of belonging. Representative items included \u0026ldquo;I believe my company\u0026rsquo;s values align with society\u0026rsquo;s values\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I believe my company actively participates in social responsibility projects and contributes to society.\u0026rdquo; The scale demonstrated excellent reliability with alpha coefficients of 0.92 for Generation Z and 0.96 for non-Generation Z.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWork values were assessed using a six-item scale based on Rokeach\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1973\u003c/span\u003e) work values framework, measuring employees\u0026rsquo; beliefs about what is important and desirable in work situations. Sample items included \u0026ldquo;I believe work should be able to demonstrate personal talents and strengths\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I believe work should be able to help people grow.\u0026rdquo; The scale showed acceptable reliability with alpha coefficients of 0.81 for Generation Z and 0.76 for non-Generation Z.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eJob satisfaction was measured using a six-item scale adapted from established job satisfaction measures, assessing employees\u0026rsquo; overall satisfaction with their work experience. Items included \u0026ldquo;I am satisfied with my current job\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I am satisfied with the company\u0026rsquo;s management and leaders.\u0026rdquo; The scale demonstrated good reliability with alpha coefficients of 0.88 for both generational groups.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTurnover intention was assessed using a five-item scale based on Mobley\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1982\u003c/span\u003e) conceptualization, measuring employees\u0026rsquo; thoughts and intentions regarding leaving their current organization. Sample items included \u0026ldquo;Since joining this company, I have considered seeking other employment\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I plan to look for another job within the next year.\u0026rdquo; The scale showed good internal consistency with alpha coefficients of 0.84 for Generation Z and 0.89 for non-Generation Z.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.4 Data Analysis Strategy\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003e The data analysis strategy employed a multi-stage approach, beginning with preliminary analyses to assess data quality and distributional properties, followed by measurement model evaluation, and concluding with structural model testing. All analyses were conducted using AMOS 25.0 software, which provides comprehensive capabilities for structural equation modeling and multi-group analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePreliminary analyses included examination of missing data patterns, outlier detection, and assessment of normality assumptions. Missing data were handled using full information maximum likelihood estimation, which provides unbiased parameter estimates under the assumption that data are missing at random. Outliers were identified using Mahalanobis distance criteria and examined for potential influence on model results.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe measurement model was evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to assess the reliability and validity of the constructs. Model fit was evaluated using multiple indices, including the chi-square test, comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR). Acceptable fit was defined as CFI and TLI values above 0.90, RMSEA values below 0.08, and SRMR values below 0.08.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eConstruct reliability was assessed using Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha coefficients and composite reliability measures, with values above 0.70 considered acceptable. Convergent validity was evaluated using average variance extracted (AVE) measures, with values above 0.50 indicating adequate convergent validity. Discriminant validity was assessed by comparing the square root of AVE for each construct with its correlations with other constructs.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe structural model was tested separately for Generation Z and non-Generation Z samples to identify potential differences in the relationships between constructs. Path coefficients, significance levels, and explained variance (R\u0026sup2;) were examined for each relationship in the model. Multi-group analysis was conducted to test for significant differences between the two generational groups in the strength and direction of relationships.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMediation effects were tested using the bootstrap method with 5,000 resamples to generate confidence intervals for indirect effects. Significant mediation was indicated when the confidence intervals did not include zero. The analysis examined both specific indirect effects through individual mediators and total indirect effects through all mediating pathways.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.1 Descriptive Statistics and Sample Characteristics\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe analysis of descriptive statistics provides important insights into the characteristics of both Generation Z and non-Generation Z samples, revealing significant differences in demographic profiles that reflect broader generational trends in the contemporary workforce. These differences have important implications for understanding the context within which turnover intention mechanisms operate across different age cohorts.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Generation Z sample (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;346) demonstrated several distinctive characteristics that align with existing research on this generational cohort. The gender distribution was relatively balanced, with 52% female and 48% male respondents. However, the marital status distribution revealed a pronounced difference from older generations, with 84% of Generation Z respondents being unmarried compared to only 52% of non-Generation Z employees. This difference reflects both the younger age of Generation Z employees and changing social trends regarding marriage timing and family formation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEducational attainment levels were notably high across both samples, with 65% of Generation Z respondents holding bachelor\u0026rsquo;s degrees and 20% holding master\u0026rsquo;s degrees. This finding is consistent with research indicating that Generation Z represents one of the most educated generations in history, with higher rates of college attendance and degree completion compared to previous cohorts at similar ages.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWork experience patterns revealed interesting insights into Generation Z career trajectories. Among Generation Z respondents, 35% had 1\u0026ndash;3 years of work experience, 34% had 3\u0026ndash;5 years, and 21% had more than 5 years of experience. This distribution suggests that the sample captured Generation Z employees across different career stages, from recent graduates to those with several years of professional experience.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIncome distribution among Generation Z respondents showed that 41% earned between NT\u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e30,000\u0026ndash;40,000 per month, with 20% earning NT\u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e40,000\u0026ndash;50,000. Notably, only 12% earned more than NT\u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e50,000 per month, reflecting the relatively early career stage of most Generation Z employees. In contrast, 44% of non-Generation Z employees earned more than NT\u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e50,000 per month, demonstrating the income progression that typically accompanies career advancement and experience accumulation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIndustry distribution revealed that Generation Z employees were well-represented across various sectors, with 20% working in semiconductor industries, 20% in manufacturing, 14% in service industries, and 9% in technology sectors. This diverse industry representation enhances the generalizability of findings across different organizational contexts and work environments.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe non-Generation Z sample (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;103) presented a contrasting demographic profile that reflects the characteristics of more established career professionals. The gender distribution was similar to Generation Z, with 54% female and 46% male respondents. However, significant differences emerged in family status, with 48% being married and 38% having children, compared to only 16% married and 6% with children among Generation Z respondents.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWork experience patterns for non-Generation Z employees showed a concentration in higher experience categories, with 95% having more than 5 years of professional experience. This distribution reflects the sample\u0026rsquo;s inclusion of Generation X and Baby Boomer employees who have had longer tenure in the workforce and have progressed further in their careers.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.2 Reliability and Validity Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe measurement model evaluation revealed strong psychometric properties for all constructs across both generational samples, providing confidence in the reliability and validity of the measurement instruments. Confirmatory factor analysis results indicated acceptable to excellent model fit, with all constructs demonstrating adequate convergent and discriminant validity.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eReliability analysis using Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha coefficients showed consistently strong internal consistency across all measures. For the Generation Z sample, alpha coefficients ranged from 0.81 (work values) to 0.93 (ability utilization), with most constructs exceeding the 0.90 threshold for excellent reliability. The non-Generation Z sample demonstrated similarly strong reliability, with alpha coefficients ranging from 0.76 (work values) to 0.96 (social identity).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComposite reliability measures further confirmed the internal consistency of the constructs, with all values exceeding the recommended threshold of 0.70. Average variance extracted (AVE) values ranged from 0.54 to 0.90 across constructs and samples, with most exceeding the recommended threshold of 0.50 for adequate convergent validity.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDiscriminant validity was assessed by comparing the square root of AVE for each construct with its correlations with other constructs. The results indicated that all constructs demonstrated adequate discriminant validity, with the square root of AVE exceeding the highest correlation with other constructs in most cases.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe correlation matrix revealed several interesting patterns that provide preliminary insights into the relationships between constructs. For Generation Z employees, the strongest correlations were observed between ability utilization and development opportunities (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.86), ability utilization and work-life quality (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.82), and salary level and job satisfaction (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.85). These strong correlations suggest important relationships between these constructs while remaining below the threshold that would indicate multicollinearity concerns.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor non-Generation Z employees, the correlation patterns differed somewhat, with the strongest correlations observed between ability utilization and development opportunities (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.87), corporate online reputation and development opportunities (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.89), and salary level and job satisfaction (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.82). These differences in correlation patterns provide early evidence of potential generational differences in the relationships between constructs.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.3 Hypothesis Testing Results for Generation Z\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe structural equation modeling results for Generation Z employees revealed a complex pattern of relationships between antecedent factors and turnover intention, with significant variations in the strength and direction of effects across different pathways. The overall model demonstrated good fit to the data and explained substantial variance in the mediating and outcome variables.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe model explained 65.5% of the variance in social identity, 32.0% of the variance in work values, 51.1% of the variance in job satisfaction, and 30.0% of the variance in turnover intention among Generation Z employees. These R\u0026sup2; values indicate that the proposed model captures a substantial portion of the systematic variance in these important workplace attitudes and intentions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eExamining the relationships between organizational factors and mediating variables, corporate online reputation emerged as a significant positive predictor of social identity (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.349, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), supporting the hypothesis that Generation Z employees\u0026rsquo; organizational identification is strongly influenced by their perceptions of their employer\u0026rsquo;s digital and online reputation. This finding is particularly noteworthy given Generation Z\u0026rsquo;s status as digital natives who rely heavily on online information sources for forming opinions about organizations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDevelopment opportunities showed a significant negative relationship with social identity (β = -0.122, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.10), contrary to the hypothesized positive relationship. This unexpected finding suggests that Generation Z employees\u0026rsquo; perceptions of development opportunities may not translate directly into stronger organizational identification, possibly reflecting their instrumental approach to career development and willingness to pursue opportunities across organizational boundaries.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor work values, corporate online reputation demonstrated a significant positive effect (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.232, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), indicating that Generation Z employees\u0026rsquo; work-related values are influenced by their perceptions of organizational reputation. Development opportunities showed no significant relationship with work values (β = -0.077, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.10), suggesting that the availability of growth opportunities may not directly shape Generation Z employees\u0026rsquo; fundamental work values.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIndividual factors showed important relationships with both mediating variables. Ability utilization significantly predicted both social identity (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.178, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) and work values (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.162, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.10), indicating that Generation Z employees\u0026rsquo; sense of organizational belonging and work-related values are enhanced when they feel able to fully utilize their skills and capabilities in their roles.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWork-life quality emerged as a significant predictor of both social identity (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.128, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) and work values (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.292, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), with a particularly strong effect on work values. This finding underscores the importance of work-life balance and quality for Generation Z employees, who often prioritize flexibility and personal fulfillment alongside professional achievement.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEconomic factors showed mixed results in their relationships with mediating variables. Salary level significantly predicted social identity (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.414, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) but showed no significant relationship with work values (β = -0.11, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.10). This pattern suggests that while compensation levels influence Generation Z employees\u0026rsquo; organizational identification, they may not fundamentally alter their work-related values and priorities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eInflation perception showed no significant relationship with social identity (β = -0.037, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.10) but significantly predicted work values (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.263, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01). This finding indicates that Generation Z employees\u0026rsquo; concerns about economic conditions and purchasing power may influence their work-related priorities and expectations without necessarily affecting their organizational identification.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe relationships between mediating variables and turnover intention revealed the expected patterns. Social identity significantly predicted job satisfaction (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.595, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), while work values also showed a significant positive relationship with job satisfaction (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.219, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). Job satisfaction, in turn, demonstrated a strong negative relationship with turnover intention (β = -0.560, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), confirming the central role of job satisfaction in the turnover process as proposed by Mobley\u0026rsquo;s model.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.4 Hypothesis Testing Results for Non-Generation Z\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe structural equation modeling results for non-Generation Z employees revealed both similarities and important differences compared to the Generation Z sample, providing insights into generational variations in the mechanisms underlying turnover intention. The overall model fit was acceptable, and the explained variance in key variables was substantial, though with some variations from the Generation Z results.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe model explained 65.1% of the variance in social identity, 35.0% of the variance in work values, 18.1% of the variance in job satisfaction, and 34.6% of the variance in turnover intention among non-Generation Z employees. While the explained variance in social identity and work values was similar to Generation Z, the lower explained variance in job satisfaction suggests that additional factors not captured in the model may be important for understanding job satisfaction among older employees.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOrganizational factors showed different patterns of relationships compared to Generation Z employees. Corporate online reputation remained a significant predictor of social identity (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.343, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), though the effect size was similar to Generation Z. However, corporate online reputation showed a stronger relationship with work values for non-Generation Z employees (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.477, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) compared to Generation Z, suggesting that organizational reputation may have broader implications for older employees\u0026rsquo; work-related attitudes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDevelopment opportunities showed a significant negative relationship with social identity (β = -0.168, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.10) for non-Generation Z employees, similar to the Generation Z pattern but with a slightly larger effect size. This finding suggests that the unexpected negative relationship between development opportunities and social identity may not be unique to Generation Z but may reflect broader changes in how employees across generations view the relationship between career development and organizational commitment.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIndividual factors demonstrated important generational differences in their effects on mediating variables. Ability utilization showed a stronger positive relationship with social identity for non-Generation Z employees (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.268, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) compared to Generation Z, but no significant relationship with work values (β = -0.040, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.10). This pattern suggests that the ability to utilize skills and talents may be more important for organizational identification among older employees, while having less impact on their fundamental work values.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWork-life quality showed the strongest relationship with social identity among non-Generation Z employees (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.565, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), with an effect size substantially larger than observed for Generation Z. However, work-life quality showed no significant relationship with work values (β = -0.036, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.10) for older employees, contrasting sharply with the strong positive relationship observed for Generation Z. This difference suggests that while work-life quality is important for organizational identification across generations, it may be more fundamental to Generation Z employees\u0026rsquo; work-related values and priorities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEconomic factors showed notably different patterns for non-Generation Z employees compared to Generation Z. Salary level demonstrated a significant negative relationship with social identity (β = -0.214, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), contrary to the positive relationship observed for Generation Z. This unexpected finding may reflect different expectations and priorities regarding compensation among older employees, who may view high salaries as potentially indicating organizational instability or unsustainable practices.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eInflation perception showed a significant negative relationship with social identity (β = -0.243, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) for non-Generation Z employees, contrasting with the non-significant relationship observed for Generation Z. This finding suggests that older employees may be more sensitive to economic uncertainty and its implications for organizational stability and long-term viability.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe relationships between mediating variables and outcomes showed similar patterns to Generation Z, with social identity significantly predicting job satisfaction (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.301, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) and work values also showing a significant positive relationship (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.227, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). Job satisfaction maintained its strong negative relationship with turnover intention (β = -0.588, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), confirming the universal importance of job satisfaction in the turnover process across generational cohorts.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"5. Discussion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e5.1 Key Findings and Theoretical Implications\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe results of this study provide compelling evidence for significant generational differences in the mechanisms underlying turnover intention, with important implications for both theoretical understanding and practical application of retention strategies. The findings extend existing knowledge by demonstrating that while Mobley\u0026rsquo;s turnover model provides a robust framework for understanding turnover processes, the specific pathways and relative importance of various factors differ substantially between Generation Z and non-Generation Z employees.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOne of the most striking findings concerns the role of corporate online reputation in shaping employee attitudes and behaviors. For both generational cohorts, corporate online reputation emerged as a significant predictor of social identity, confirming the growing importance of organizational reputation in the digital age. However, the mechanisms through which reputation influences employee outcomes differ between generations. For Generation Z employees, corporate online reputation primarily affects organizational identification, while for non-Generation Z employees, it has broader implications for both social identity and work values.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis difference reflects the unique relationship that Generation Z has with digital information and online platforms. As digital natives, Generation Z employees have grown up in an environment where online reputation and social media presence are integral to identity formation and decision-making processes. Their comfort with digital platforms and reliance on online information sources makes corporate online reputation a particularly salient factor in their organizational evaluations. However, their instrumental approach to career development may limit the extent to which organizational reputation influences their fundamental work values, which appear to be more stable and internally driven.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe unexpected negative relationship between development opportunities and social identity across both generational cohorts represents one of the most intriguing findings of this study. This result challenges conventional wisdom about the relationship between career development opportunities and organizational commitment, suggesting that contemporary employees may view development opportunities more instrumentally than previous research has assumed.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSeveral theoretical explanations may account for this finding. First, the concept of boundaryless careers, as described by Briscoe and Hall (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e), suggests that contemporary employees increasingly view career development as a personal responsibility that transcends organizational boundaries. From this perspective, development opportunities provided by organizations may be valued for their immediate benefits rather than as indicators of organizational investment that warrant reciprocal commitment.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSecond, the finding may reflect changing expectations about the employment relationship, particularly among younger employees who have witnessed economic uncertainty and organizational restructuring throughout their formative years. These employees may view development opportunities as standard organizational offerings rather than special investments that create obligations for long-term commitment.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe differential effects of work-life quality across generational cohorts provide important insights into changing workplace priorities and values. For Generation Z employees, work-life quality demonstrated significant positive relationships with both social identity and work values, indicating that this factor is fundamental to their workplace experience and organizational evaluations. The particularly strong relationship with work values suggests that work-life quality is not merely a job attribute that Generation Z employees prefer, but rather a core component of their fundamental beliefs about what work should provide.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn contrast, non-Generation Z employees showed a strong relationship between work-life quality and social identity but no significant relationship with work values. This pattern suggests that while older employees also value work-life balance and quality, they may view these factors as organizational benefits rather than fundamental aspects of their work-related value systems. This difference may reflect generational variations in socialization experiences, with Generation Z having grown up in an era where work-life integration was increasingly emphasized and modeled.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe role of economic factors in shaping employee attitudes revealed particularly interesting generational differences that have important implications for compensation and benefits strategies. For Generation Z employees, salary level showed a strong positive relationship with social identity but no significant relationship with work values. This pattern suggests that while compensation levels influence Generation Z employees\u0026rsquo; organizational identification, they do not fundamentally alter their work-related priorities and values.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe positive relationship between salary level and social identity among Generation Z employees may reflect their early career stage and the importance of financial security in establishing independence and achieving life goals. However, the absence of a relationship with work values suggests that Generation Z employees maintain distinct priorities that are not easily altered by compensation levels alone.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor non-Generation Z employees, the significant negative relationship between salary level and social identity presents a puzzling finding that warrants careful interpretation. This result may reflect several underlying dynamics, including concerns about organizational sustainability when compensation levels appear excessive, or preferences for other forms of organizational investment such as job security or benefits. Alternatively, this finding may indicate that older employees have more complex relationships with compensation that incorporate considerations of equity, sustainability, and organizational values.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe differential effects of inflation perception across generational cohorts provide insights into how economic uncertainty influences employee attitudes and behaviors. Generation Z employees showed no significant relationship between inflation perception and social identity but a strong positive relationship with work values. This pattern suggests that economic concerns may influence Generation Z employees\u0026rsquo; work-related priorities without necessarily affecting their organizational commitment.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn contrast, non-Generation Z employees demonstrated significant negative relationships between inflation perception and social identity, suggesting that economic uncertainty may undermine their organizational identification and commitment. This difference may reflect generational variations in economic experiences and expectations, with older employees having lived through periods of greater economic stability and therefore being more sensitive to indicators of economic uncertainty.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e5.2 Practical Implications for Human Resource Management\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study have significant implications for human resource management practices, particularly in the areas of recruitment, retention, and organizational culture development. The evidence for generational differences in turnover intention mechanisms suggests that organizations must move beyond one-size-fits-all approaches toward more nuanced, generation-specific strategies that address the unique needs and priorities of different employee cohorts.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor Generation Z employees, the strong relationship between corporate online reputation and social identity highlights the critical importance of digital reputation management as a retention strategy. Organizations seeking to attract and retain Generation Z talent must invest in building and maintaining positive online presence across multiple platforms, including social media, employer review sites, and professional networks. This investment should encompass not only marketing and public relations activities but also authentic demonstration of organizational values and social responsibility commitments.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe emphasis on work-life quality among Generation Z employees suggests that organizations must fundamentally rethink traditional approaches to work design and employee benefits. Rather than viewing work-life balance as an additional perk or benefit, organizations should recognize that work-life quality is a core component of Generation Z employees\u0026rsquo; work values and organizational evaluations. This recognition should translate into policies and practices that support flexible work arrangements, mental health and wellness programs, and integration of personal and professional development opportunities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe finding that ability utilization significantly influences both social identity and work values among Generation Z employees underscores the importance of job design and role clarity in retention strategies. Organizations should ensure that Generation Z employees have opportunities to apply their skills and talents fully, with particular attention to leveraging their technological fluency and innovative thinking capabilities. This may require restructuring traditional job roles and hierarchies to provide more autonomy and creative freedom for younger employees.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor non-Generation Z employees, the stronger relationship between work-life quality and social identity, combined with the absence of a relationship with work values, suggests that work-life balance initiatives should be positioned as organizational benefits that demonstrate care and support for employees rather than fundamental changes to work philosophy. This positioning may resonate more effectively with older employees who may have different expectations about the boundaries between work and personal life.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe complex relationship between salary level and employee attitudes across generational cohorts suggests that compensation strategies must be carefully calibrated to address different generational priorities and concerns. For Generation Z employees, competitive compensation levels may be important for organizational identification and commitment, but organizations should not assume that higher salaries alone will address retention challenges. Instead, compensation should be combined with other factors that address Generation Z priorities, such as development opportunities, work-life quality, and organizational purpose.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor non-Generation Z employees, the negative relationship between salary level and social identity suggests that compensation strategies should emphasize fairness, sustainability, and alignment with organizational values rather than simply maximizing salary levels. Organizations may find that older employees respond more positively to comprehensive benefits packages, job security measures, and recognition programs that acknowledge their experience and contributions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe differential effects of inflation perception across generational cohorts suggest that economic communication strategies should be tailored to address different generational concerns and priorities. For Generation Z employees, organizations should focus on how economic conditions may affect career development opportunities and work-related priorities, while for older employees, communication should address organizational stability and long-term viability in uncertain economic conditions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOrganizations should also recognize that the mediating role of social identity, work values, and job satisfaction in the turnover process provides multiple intervention points for retention strategies. Rather than focusing solely on addressing turnover intention directly, organizations can develop comprehensive approaches that strengthen organizational identification, align with employee work values, and enhance job satisfaction through multiple pathways.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe evidence for generational differences in these mediating relationships suggests that organizations should develop differentiated approaches to building social identity and enhancing job satisfaction. For Generation Z employees, social identity may be strengthened through authentic demonstration of organizational values, investment in digital reputation, and provision of meaningful work opportunities. For older employees, social identity may be enhanced through recognition of experience and expertise, provision of stable and supportive work environments, and demonstration of organizational commitment to employee welfare.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e5.3 Limitations and Future Research Directions\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhile this study provides valuable insights into generational differences in turnover intention mechanisms, several limitations should be acknowledged that provide opportunities for future research. The cross-sectional design limits the ability to make causal inferences about the relationships between variables, and longitudinal research would provide stronger evidence for the proposed causal pathways. Future studies should consider following employees over time to examine how the relationships between organizational factors, mediating variables, and turnover intention evolve as employees gain experience and progress in their careers.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe sample composition, while adequate for the research objectives, may limit the generalizability of findings across different cultural and organizational contexts. The study was conducted primarily in Taiwan, and cultural factors may influence the relationships between variables in ways that differ from other national contexts. Future research should examine these relationships across different cultural settings to assess the universality of the observed generational differences.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe measurement of generational cohorts using birth year cutoffs, while consistent with established practice, may not fully capture the complexity of generational identity and experience. Future research might consider alternative approaches to defining generational membership, such as shared experiences or value orientations, that may provide more nuanced understanding of generational differences in workplace behavior.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"6. Conclusion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec22\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e6.1 Summary of Findings\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003e This study has provided comprehensive empirical evidence for significant generational differences in the mechanisms underlying turnover intention, contributing to both theoretical understanding and practical knowledge in the field of human resource management. Through the application of Mobley\u0026rsquo;s turnover model to a comparative analysis of Generation Z and non-Generation Z employees, the research has revealed nuanced patterns of relationships between organizational, individual, and economic factors and turnover intention that vary substantially across generational cohorts.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe most significant finding concerns the differential role of corporate online reputation in shaping employee attitudes and behaviors across generations. While corporate online reputation emerged as a significant predictor of social identity for both generational cohorts, its broader implications for work values were more pronounced among non-Generation Z employees. This finding reflects the unique relationship that Generation Z has with digital information and online platforms, where organizational reputation serves as a key factor in organizational identification but does not fundamentally alter their work-related value systems, which appear to be more internally driven and stable.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe unexpected negative relationship between development opportunities and social identity across both generational cohorts represents a paradigm-shifting finding that challenges conventional assumptions about the relationship between career development and organizational commitment. This result suggests that contemporary employees, regardless of generation, may view development opportunities more instrumentally than previous research has assumed, reflecting the emergence of boundaryless career orientations and changing expectations about the employment relationship.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe differential effects of work-life quality across generational cohorts provide crucial insights into evolving workplace priorities and values. For Generation Z employees, work-life quality demonstrated fundamental importance, influencing both organizational identification and core work values. This pattern indicates that work-life integration is not merely a preferred job attribute for Generation Z but rather a core component of their workplace philosophy and organizational evaluations. In contrast, non-Generation Z employees showed strong relationships between work-life quality and organizational identification but no significant impact on work values, suggesting that older employees view work-life balance as an important organizational benefit rather than a fundamental aspect of their work-related value systems.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe complex relationships between economic factors and employee attitudes revealed particularly interesting generational variations with important implications for compensation strategies. Generation Z employees demonstrated positive relationships between salary level and organizational identification but no significant impact on work values, suggesting that while compensation influences their organizational commitment, it does not fundamentally alter their work-related priorities. The contrasting negative relationship between salary level and social identity among non-Generation Z employees presents a counterintuitive finding that may reflect concerns about organizational sustainability or preferences for other forms of organizational investment.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe role of inflation perception in shaping employee attitudes also varied significantly across generations, with Generation Z employees showing strong relationships between economic concerns and work values but no impact on organizational identification. Non-Generation Z employees demonstrated the opposite pattern, with inflation perception negatively affecting organizational identification but not influencing work values. These differences suggest that economic uncertainty affects different aspects of the employment relationship depending on generational perspectives and experiences.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe mediating role of social identity, work values, and job satisfaction in the turnover process was confirmed across both generational cohorts, validating the core propositions of Mobley\u0026rsquo;s turnover model while revealing important variations in the antecedents of these mediating variables. The consistent strong negative relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intention across generations confirms the universal importance of job satisfaction in retention decisions, while the differential pathways to job satisfaction highlight the need for generation-specific approaches to enhancing employee satisfaction and commitment.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec23\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e6.2 Theoretical Contributions and Implications\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis research makes several important theoretical contributions to the literature on turnover intention, generational differences, and organizational behavior. First, it extends Mobley\u0026rsquo;s turnover model by demonstrating how generational factors moderate the relationships between various antecedents and turnover intention, providing a more nuanced understanding of the conditions under which different factors influence employee retention decisions. The finding that the same theoretical model can produce different patterns of relationships across generational cohorts highlights the importance of considering demographic factors as boundary conditions for established theoretical relationships.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSecond, the study contributes to generational theory by providing empirical evidence for specific mechanisms through which generational differences manifest in workplace behavior. Rather than relying on broad generalizations about generational characteristics, this research identifies specific pathways through which generational membership influences the evaluation of organizational factors and the formation of workplace attitudes. The differential effects of corporate online reputation, work-life quality, and economic factors across generations provide concrete evidence for the theoretical proposition that generational experiences shape workplace priorities and decision-making processes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThird, the research advances understanding of the role of digital and online factors in contemporary employment relationships. The significant effects of corporate online reputation across both generations, with particularly strong implications for Generation Z employees, highlight the growing importance of digital reputation management in human resource practices. This finding extends existing research on employer branding and organizational attractiveness by demonstrating the specific mechanisms through which online reputation influences employee attitudes and behaviors.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFourth, the unexpected negative relationship between development opportunities and social identity across both generations challenges existing theoretical assumptions about the relationship between career development and organizational commitment. This finding suggests that established theories about the psychological contract and organizational commitment may need to be revised to reflect changing employee expectations and career orientations in the contemporary workplace.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study also contributes to social identity theory by demonstrating how different factors contribute to organizational identification across generational cohorts. The finding that work-life quality has stronger effects on social identity among non-Generation Z employees, while corporate online reputation and ability utilization are more important for Generation Z, suggests that the sources of organizational identification may be generation-specific and require tailored approaches to foster employee commitment.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec24\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e6.3 Practical Implications for Organizations\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study have profound implications for organizational practice, particularly in the areas of human resource management, organizational culture development, and retention strategy design. Organizations operating in contemporary labor markets must recognize that traditional, one-size-fits-all approaches to employee management are increasingly inadequate for addressing the diverse needs and expectations of multigenerational workforces.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor Generation Z employees, organizations must prioritize digital reputation management as a core component of their talent attraction and retention strategies. This involves not only maintaining positive online presence across multiple platforms but also ensuring authentic demonstration of organizational values and social responsibility commitments. Organizations should invest in comprehensive digital reputation monitoring and management systems that track and respond to online discussions about their employer brand and workplace culture.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe fundamental importance of work-life quality for Generation Z employees requires organizations to rethink traditional approaches to work design and employee benefits. Rather than treating work-life balance as an additional perk, organizations should integrate flexibility and work-life integration into their core value propositions and operational practices. This may require significant changes to traditional work arrangements, including flexible scheduling, remote work options, and policies that support personal and professional integration.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe strong relationship between ability utilization and both social identity and work values among Generation Z employees underscores the importance of job design and role clarity in retention strategies. Organizations should ensure that Generation Z employees have meaningful opportunities to apply their skills and talents, with particular attention to leveraging their technological fluency and innovative thinking capabilities. This may require restructuring traditional hierarchies and job roles to provide greater autonomy and creative freedom.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor non-Generation Z employees, the stronger relationship between work-life quality and social identity, combined with the absence of effects on work values, suggests that work-life balance initiatives should be positioned as organizational benefits that demonstrate care and support rather than fundamental changes to work philosophy. Organizations should emphasize how these initiatives reflect organizational commitment to employee welfare and long-term sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe complex relationships between compensation and employee attitudes across generations require sophisticated approaches to compensation strategy design. Organizations should recognize that competitive salary levels may be important for Generation Z organizational identification but should not assume that higher compensation alone will address retention challenges. Instead, compensation should be integrated with other factors that address Generation Z priorities, including development opportunities, work-life quality, and organizational purpose.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor non-Generation Z employees, compensation strategies should emphasize fairness, sustainability, and alignment with organizational values rather than simply maximizing salary levels. Organizations may find that comprehensive benefits packages, job security measures, and recognition programs that acknowledge experience and contributions are more effective than pure salary increases.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOrganizations should also develop differentiated communication strategies that address generational differences in economic concerns and priorities. For Generation Z employees, communication should focus on how economic conditions may affect career development opportunities and work-related priorities, while for older employees, communication should address organizational stability and long-term viability in uncertain economic conditions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec25\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e6.4 Limitations and Future Research Directions\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhile this study provides valuable insights into generational differences in turnover intention mechanisms, several limitations should be acknowledged that provide opportunities for future research. The cross-sectional design limits the ability to make causal inferences about the relationships between variables, and longitudinal research would provide stronger evidence for the proposed causal pathways. Future studies should consider following employees over time to examine how the relationships between organizational factors, mediating variables, and turnover intention evolve as employees gain experience and progress in their careers.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe sample composition, while adequate for the research objectives, may limit the generalizability of findings across different cultural and organizational contexts. The study was conducted primarily in Taiwan, and cultural factors may influence the relationships between variables in ways that differ from other national contexts. Future research should examine these relationships across different cultural settings to assess the universality of the observed generational differences.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe measurement of generational cohorts using birth year cutoffs, while consistent with established practice, may not fully capture the complexity of generational identity and experience. Future research might consider alternative approaches to defining generational membership, such as shared experiences or value orientations, that may provide more nuanced understanding of generational differences in workplace behavior.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study focused on a limited set of organizational, individual, and economic factors, and future research should explore additional variables that may influence turnover intention across generations. Factors such as organizational culture, leadership styles, team dynamics, and industry characteristics may provide additional insights into the mechanisms underlying generational differences in turnover intention.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe unexpected negative relationship between development opportunities and social identity warrants further investigation to understand the underlying mechanisms and boundary conditions for this relationship. Future research should explore whether this finding reflects changing expectations about career development, instrumental approaches to skill acquisition, or other factors that may influence how employees interpret and respond to development opportunities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFuture research should also examine the long-term implications of generational differences in turnover intention mechanisms. As Generation Z employees gain experience and progress in their careers, their priorities and attitudes may evolve in ways that affect the relationships observed in this study. Longitudinal research tracking generational cohorts over time would provide valuable insights into the stability and evolution of these patterns.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study\u0026rsquo;s focus on turnover intention, while theoretically justified, should be complemented by research examining actual turnover behavior and its consequences for organizations. Future studies should investigate whether the generational differences in turnover intention mechanisms translate into differential patterns of actual turnover and whether these differences have implications for organizational performance and competitiveness.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFinally, future research should explore the implications of generational differences for other important organizational outcomes, such as employee engagement, performance, innovation, and organizational citizenship behavior. Understanding how generational factors influence these outcomes would provide a more comprehensive picture of the implications of workforce demographic changes for organizational effectiveness and success.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthical Approval and Consent to Participate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of academic research. Participation in the survey was entirely voluntary and anonymous. All participants were informed of the research purpose and provided their consent prior to completing the questionnaire. Ethical approval for this research was obtained from the institutional review board of the authors\u0026rsquo; affiliated university.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for Publication\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eM.-C.W. conceptualized and designed the research framework, formulated the hypotheses, and supervised the overall study. Y.-H.C. collected and analyzed the data, performed the statistical tests, and contributed to the interpretation of results. Both authors contributed equally to the writing, review, and final approval of the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarhate, B., \u0026amp; Dirani, K. M. (2022). Career aspirations of generation Z: A systematic literature review. European Journal of Training and Development, 46(1/2), 139\u0026ndash;157.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBriscoe, J. P., \u0026amp; Hall, D. T. (2006). The interplay of boundaryless and protean careers: Combinations and implications. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69(1), 4\u0026ndash;18.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCengiz, D., Dube, A., Lindner, A., \u0026amp; Zipperer, B. (2019). The effect of minimum wages on low-wage jobs. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 134(3), 1405\u0026ndash;1454.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eClimek, M., Gajek, L., Krumay, B., \u0026amp; Fertsch, M. (2024). Employee turnover antecedents across different generations: An integrative literature review. Management Review Quarterly, 74(1), 245\u0026ndash;284.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDalton, D. R. (1997). Organizational behavior and management. South-Western College Publishing.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDeci, E. L., \u0026amp; Moller, A. C. (2005). The concept of competence: A starting place for understanding intrinsic motivation and self-determined extrinsic motivation. Handbook of Competence and Motivation, 579\u0026ndash;597.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDutton, J. E., Dukerich, J. M., \u0026amp; Harquail, C. V. (1994). Organizational images and member identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(2), 239\u0026ndash;263.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEisner, S. P. (2005). Managing generation Y. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 70(4), 4\u0026ndash;15.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEngland, G. W. (1975). The manager and his values: An international perspective from the United States, Japan, Korea, India, and Australia. Ballinger Publishing Company.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFinkelstein, L. M., Costanza, D. P., \u0026amp; Goodwin, G. F. (2015). Do your high potentials have potential? The impact of individual differences and designation on leader success. Personnel Psychology, 68(1), 187\u0026ndash;214.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGabriel, A. S., Campbell, J. T., Djurdjevic, E., Johnson, R. E., \u0026amp; Rosen, C. C. (2020). Fuzzy profiles: Comparing and contrasting latent profile analysis and fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis for person-centered research. Organizational Research Methods, 23(4), 663\u0026ndash;684.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGeck, C. (2006). The generation Z connection: Teaching information literacy to the newest net generation. Teacher Librarian, 33(3), 19\u0026ndash;23.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGreening, D. W., \u0026amp; Turban, D. B. (2000). Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce. Business \u0026amp; Society, 39(3), 254\u0026ndash;280.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGuest, D. E. (2004). The psychology of the employment relationship: An analysis based on the psychological contract. Applied Psychology, 53(4), 541\u0026ndash;555.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGyur\u0026aacute;k Babeľov\u0026aacute;, Z., Stareček, A., Koltnerov\u0026aacute;, K., \u0026amp; Cag\u0026aacute;ňov\u0026aacute;, D. (2020). Perceived organizational support for creativity, responsible leadership and organizational pride in lecturers from private and public universities. Sustainability, 12(10), 4061.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHammond, M. S., Locklear, T. S., \u0026amp; Borman, W. C. (2010). The development of a comprehensive measure of work values. Poster presented at the 25th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Atlanta, GA.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHansford, B. (2002). Work-life balance: A guide for HR in achieving organisational and individual change. Butterworth-Heinemann.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHenne, D., \u0026amp; Locke, E. A. (1985). Job dissatisfaction: What are the consequences? International Journal of Psychology, 20(2), 221\u0026ndash;240.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKalleberg, A. L. (1977). Work values and job rewards: A theory of job satisfaction. American Sociological Review, 42(1), 124\u0026ndash;143.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKirschenbaum, A., \u0026amp; Weisberg, J. (2002). Employee\u0026rsquo;s turnover intentions and job destination choices. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(1), 109\u0026ndash;125.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKuzior, A., Kwilinski, A., \u0026amp; Tkachenko, V. (2022). Sustainable development of organizations based on the combinatorial model of artificial intelligence. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 7(2), 1353\u0026ndash;1376.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLocke, E. A., \u0026amp; Henne, D. (1985). Work motivation theories. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 1\u0026ndash;35.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMael, F., \u0026amp; Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(2), 103\u0026ndash;123.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMannheim, K. (1952). The problem of generations. Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge, 24, 276\u0026ndash;322.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMobley, W. H. (1982). Employee turnover: Causes, consequences, and control. Addison-Wesley.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMobley, W. H., Horner, S. O., \u0026amp; Hollingsworth, A. T. (1978). An evaluation of precursors of hospital employee turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63(4), 408\u0026ndash;414.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePoll\u0026aacute;k, F., Vod\u0026aacute;k, J., Soviar, J., Markovič, P., Lentini, G., Mazzeschi, V., \u0026amp; Lu\u0026egrave;, A. (2021). Promotion of electric mobility in the European Union\u0026mdash;Overview of project PROMETEUS. Transportation Research Procedia, 55, 30\u0026ndash;37.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePrice, J. L. (1977). The study of turnover. Iowa State University Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. Free Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRousseau, D. M. (1998). The \u0026lsquo;problem\u0026rsquo; of the psychological contract considered. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(S1), 665\u0026ndash;671.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchroer, W. J. (2013). Generations X, Y, Z and the others. The Portal, 40(4), 9\u0026ndash;16.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSuper, D. E. (1970). Work Values Inventory. Houghton Mifflin.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVan Knippenberg, D., \u0026amp; Van Schie, E. C. (2000). Foci and correlates of organizational identification. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73(2), 137\u0026ndash;147.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang, M., \u0026amp; Huangfu, S. (2018). Inflation and real wage dispersion in a frictional labor market. Economics Letters, 162, 51\u0026ndash;54.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Generation Z, Turnover Intention, Mobley’s Model, Work Values, Social Identity, Human Resource Management, Generational Differences","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7862963/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7862963/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThe emergence of Generation Z in the contemporary workforce has fundamentally transformed organizational dynamics and human resource management practices across industries worldwide. This study investigates the differential factors influencing turnover intention between Generation Z and non-Generation Z employees through the theoretical lens of Mobley\u0026rsquo;s turnover model. Drawing upon a comprehensive dataset of 449 respondents (346 Generation Z and 103 non-Generation Z employees), this research employs structural equation modeling to examine the complex relationships between organizational factors, individual factors, economic labor market factors, and turnover intention, with social identity, work values, and job satisfaction serving as mediating variables.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings reveal significant generational differences in the antecedents of turnover intention. For Generation Z employees, corporate online reputation (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.349, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), ability utilization (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.178, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), and work-life quality (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.128, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) emerge as the most influential factors affecting social identity, while inflation perception (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.263, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) and work-life quality (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.292, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) significantly impact work values. Conversely, non-Generation Z employees demonstrate different patterns, with salary level (β = -0.214, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) and work-life quality (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.565, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) showing stronger influences on their workplace attitudes and behaviors.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study contributes to the existing literature by providing empirical evidence of generational differences in turnover intention mechanisms and offers practical implications for organizations seeking to develop generation-specific retention strategies. The results suggest that while traditional factors such as compensation remain important for older generations, Generation Z employees prioritize organizational reputation, personal growth opportunities, and work-life balance. These findings have significant implications for human resource management practices, particularly in the areas of recruitment, retention, and organizational culture development.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Generational Differences in Turnover Intention: A Comparative Study of Generation Z and Non-Generation Z Employees Based on Mobley’s Turnover Model","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-11-12 16:06:41","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7862963/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"52b7f595-b825-41cf-a5f4-55555c686c2c","owner":[],"postedDate":"November 12th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-01-22T09:42:17+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-11-12 16:06:41","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7862963","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7862963","identity":"rs-7862963","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}