Inclusive Leadership and Age Diversity: Implications for Performance in Nigeria’s Industrial Workplaces

This study investigates the impact of age diversity on employee performance within Nigeria’s manufacturing sector. In today’s multigenerational workplace, organizations comprise employees from Baby Boomers to Generation Z, each contributing distinct experiences, skills, and work ethics. While age diversity can enhance creativity, decision-making, and innovation, its benefits are not automatic and depend on effective management practices. Poorly managed age-related differences may lead to conflict, communication breakdowns, and reduced cohesion. The study is anchored on the Similarity-Attraction Theory, which explains how demographic similarities influence group formation and cooperation in the workplace. A quantitative research design was employed, utilizing a cross-sectional survey method. Data was collected using a structured, self-administered questionnaire distributed to 210 employees selected through a combination of cluster, proportional, and convenience sampling techniques across five departments of the company. The respondents, aged between 18 and 65, represented various managerial levels. Statistical analysis, including correlation, was conducted to examine the relationship between age diversity and organizational performance. The findings revealed a weak positive correlation (r = 0.041, p < .05), suggesting that age diversity contributes marginally to improved performance, potentially limited by unresolved generational tensions and inconsistent inclusion practices. The study concludes that while age diversity holds promise for enhancing performance, this potential remains underutilized in the absence of strategic diversity management. Recommendations include implementing inclusive leadership training, mentorship programs, and intergenerational team-building initiatives to bridge generational gaps and harness age diversity as a strategic organizational asset.

Age Diversity, Employee Performance, Generational Workforce

1. Abbasi, Z., Billsberry, J., & Todres, M. (2024). Empirical studies of the “similarity leads to attraction” hypothesis in workplace interactions: a systematic review. Management Review Quarterly, 74(2), 661-709. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Alesina, A. La Ferrara, E. (2005). Who Trusts Others? Journal of Public Economics. 85, 207 – 234. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Amadi, K. I. (2025). Workplace Diversity Issues in Business Enterprises: A Literature Review. International Journal of Business & Law Research 13(1):136-150 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Arkorful, H., Hilton, S. K., & Awaah, F. (2025). Generational cohorts and their predisposition toward entrepreneurship in an emerging economy. Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences, 41(1), 245-262. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Bayat, M., Banihashem, S. K., & Noroozi, O. (2022). The effects of collaborative reasoning strategies on improving primary school students’ argumentative decision-making skills. The Journal of educaTional research, 115(6), 349-358. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Byrne, D., Gouaux, C., Griffitt, W., Lamberth, J., Murakawa, N. B. P. M., Prasad, M., ... & Ramirez III, M. (1971). The ubiquitous relationship: Attitude similarity and attraction: A cross-cultural study. Human Relations, 24(3), 201-207. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Coyle-Shapiro, J. A., & Shore, L. M. (2007). The employee–organization relationship: Where do we go from here?. Human resource management review, 17(2), 166-179. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Darwin, J. R. &Palanisamy, C. S. (2015). The effects of workforce diversity on employee performance in Singapore organizations. International Journal of Business Administration, 6(2), 17 – 29 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Darwin, J. R. (2014). Age diversity and its impact on employee performance in Singapore. International Journal of Research and Development in Technology & Management Science. Kailash, 21(5),79 – 98 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Deshpande, P., & Kulshreshtha, K. (2024). Examining the Influence of Diversity in the Workforce on Employee Perception in Indian Manufacturing Sector. Library of Progress-Library Science, Information Technology & Computer, 44(3). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Dezo, C. L., & Ross, D. (2012). Does female representation in top management improve firm performance? A panel data investigation. Strategic Management Journal, 33(1), 1 – 46. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Simons, S. M. & Rowland, K. N. (2011). Diversity and Its Impact on Organizational Performance: The Influence of Diversity Constructions on Expectations and Outcomes. Journal of Technology, Management and Innovation, 6(3), 172 – 183. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Emmanuel, N., & Dze, B. N. (2021). Does Employee Performance Mediate the Effect of Workforce Diversity on Organisational Performance? Evidence from Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in the Buea Municipality. Archives of Business Research, 9(7). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Ezeafulukwe, C., Onyekwelu, S. C., Onyekwelu, N. P., Ike, C. U., Bello, B. G., & Asuzu, F. O. (2024). Best practices in human resources for inclusive employment: An in-depth review. International Journal of Science and Research Archive, 11(1), 1286-1293. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. George, A. S., Baskar, T., & Srikaanth, P. B. (2024). Bridging the Generational Divide: Fostering Intergenerational Collaboration and Innovation in the Modern Workplace. Partners Universal International Innovation Journal, 2(3), 198-217. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Gerhardt, M., Nachemson-Ekwall, J., & Fogel, B. (2021). Gentelligence: The revolutionary approach to leading an intergenerational workforce. Rowman & Littlefield. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Glass A (2017). Understanding generational differences for competitive success. Industrial. Communication and Training, 39 (2), 98-103. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Griffin, R. W., & Moorhead, G. (2014). Organizational Behaviour: Managing People and Organizations. Canada: Michael Schenk. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Haslam, S. A., Powell, C., & Turner, J. (2000). Social identity, self‐categorization, and work motivation: rethinking the contribution of the group to positive and sustainable organisational outcomes. Applied Psychology, 49(3), 319-339. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Hellerstedt, K., Uman, T., & Wennberg, K. (2024). Fooled by diversity? When diversity initiatives exacerbate rather than mitigate bias and inequality. Academy of Management Perspectives, 38(1), 23-42. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Huang, Y. H., Liang, W. L., Truong, Q. T., & Wang, Y. (2022). No new tricks for old dogs? Old directors and innovation performance. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 179, 121659. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Kunze, F., Boehm, S. A., & Bruch, H. (2011). Age Diversity, Age Discrimination Climatte and Performance Consequences: A Cross Organizational Study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(2), 264-290. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Kunze, F., Boehm, S. A., & Bruch, H. (2021). It matters how old we feel in organizations: Testing a multilevel model of organizational subjective‐age diversity on employee outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(4), 448-463. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Leroy, H., Buengeler, C., Veestraeten, M., Shemla, M., & Hoever, I. J. (2022). Fostering team creativity through team-focused inclusion: The role of leader harvesting the benefits of diversity and cultivating value-in-diversity beliefs. Group & Organization Management, 47(4), 798-839. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Mutunga, F. &Gachunga, H. (2013). Factors Affecting Succession Planning in Small and Medium Enterprises in Kenya. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 3 (8), 285 – 300. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. North, M. S. (2022). Chinese versus United States workplace ageism as GATE-ism: Generation, age, tenure, experience. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 817160. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Nwachukwu, C., & Chladková, H. (2017). Human resource management practices and employee satisfaction in microfinance banks in Nigeria. Trends Economics and Management, 28(1), 23-35. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Nwakanma, C. H. (2024). Diversity and Inclusion in the Nigerian Work Environment: Opportunities and Challenges. Social Sciences, Humanities and Education Journal (SHE Journal), 5(1), 163-â. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Patel, T. K. (2016). A Study on Predictors to Maintain Workforce Diversity among Teaching Faculties in Engineering and Management Institutes of Surat City. Research Hub- International Multidisciplinary Research Journal (RHIMRJ), 3(5), 1-4. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Pletzer, J. L. (2021). Why older employees engage in less counterproductive work behavior and in more organizational citizenship behavior: Examining the role of the HEXACO personality traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 173, 110550. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Rudolph, C. W., & Zacher, H. (2024). How, why, and when is the average age of employees related to climate for innovation? The role of age diversity, focus on opportunities, and work engagement. Group & Organization Management, 49(3), 543-576. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Shore, L. M., & Chung, B. G. (2022). Inclusive leadership: How leaders sustain or discourage work group inclusion. Group & organization management, 47(4), 723-754. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Tolbize, A. (2008). Generational differences in the workplace. [Online], available at: http://rtc.umn.edu/docs/2_18_Gen_diff_workplace.pdf. [Accessed: 17/02/2025 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Trompenaars, F., & Woolliams, P. (2025). Creativity in Teams. In New Approaches to Creating a Culture of Innovation (pp. 33-50). Emerald Publishing Limited. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Urick, M. J. (2022). Leadership in multigenerational organizations: Strategies to successfully manage an age diverse workforce. Emerald Publishing Limited. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. van Dijk, H., van Engen, M. L., & Paauwe, J. (2012). Reframing the business case for diversity: A values and virtues perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(1), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1434-z [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Zaidi, S. M. A., Saif, M. I. &Zaheer, A. (2010). The effect of workgroup heterogeneity on decision making: an empirical decision making. African Journal of Business Management, 41 (10), 2132 – 2139. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Understanding Academic Leadership: Theory, Practice and Future Horizons
• A Literature Review on Leadership and Cultural Evolution of Adventism in East Africa Region
• Unlocking Employee Creativity Through Empowering Leadership: The Dynamic Interplay of Trust and Engagement
• The Integration of Preachers’ Leadership Competencies in Empowering Preachers for the Orang Asli Community in Malaysia
• Traditional Authority vs. Legacy Leadership: A Comparative Literature Review from the Arab World