Personality & Individual Differences - Research Paper Example

Section/# Ageism: A Review and Analysis of its Determinants and Impacts Bias and its impacts has been a topic that scholarship has engaged with two an increasing level over the past several decades. For instance, prior to the 1950s or 1960s, it was uncommon for scholarship to focus upon the issue of race and racism or the means by which this could impact upon the individual lives of stakeholders within society. Likewise, the impacts of sex and sexism were also not thoroughly considered up until the 1960s or 1970s. However, the modern world sees these two issues as determinant factors which impact upon whether or not an individual is successful and/or expected within many social engagements. In much the same way that sexism and/or racism and not effectively been understood or studied up until the past several decades, it is also fair and truthful to assert that ageism is a relevant factor that few analysts have considered up until the past several years. Whereas it is fairly obvious that individuals are judged, separated, discriminated against, and otherwise relegated to certain roles within society as a function of their race or their gender, few individuals have previously consider the impact that age has upon the way in which social organization and engagement takes place (McMahon 19). However, those scholars that have analyzed the situation have conclusively bound that ageism is a powerful and determinate factor that separates and discriminates against those that are considered as “too old” or “out of touch” with the modern world. As a function of seeking to understand this dynamic to a more clear and relevant degree, the following analysis will engage with relevant resources that have analyzed measure the issue of ageism within current society and will attempt to indicate whether or not this particular issue is of growing or decreasing importance in the modern era (Spedale et al. 1591). Firstly, it must be understood that ageism within the workforce is perhaps indicative of ageism at its worst. For decades, companies have sought to marginalize and “let go” of employees that are beyond a certain age. There are several relevant factors as why this takes place. The first and most important of which has to do with the fact that individuals of a more advanced age are likely to command a higher salary and will place pressure upon the overall bottom line that a company is able to exhibit. For instance, an individual towards the end of their career is likely to make at least twice the overall amount that an individual just beginning their career might be able to earn in terms of salary. Recognizing this is a relevant constraint upon the overall amount of money that a firm could post in terms of profitability, many companies seek to encourage older individuals to retire early and/or look for each and every opportunity to lay them off (Nelson 12). The underlying rationale for this has to do with the fact that they could ultimately be twice as profitable if they were to replace the older employee with two younger employees. Whereas it is true that ageism occurs for many different reasons, a large percentage of the existing scholarship on the topic indicates that prejudice is one of the most common factors that contribute to ageism. Essentially, individuals throughout society feel as if individuals of an older demographic are somehow incapable of performing at the same level or commensurate with younger individuals throughout society. Although it is invariably true that older individuals are oftentimes more thoughtful and methodical in terms of their approach to certain issues, this should not indicate that older individuals are somehow inherently less capable as compared to their younger counterparts. However, this flawed and faulty prejudice is one that oftentimes encourages employers and other stakeholders throughout society to marginalize older individuals as less capable as compared to younger ones (Dennis 87). This incorrect and faulty perception is ultimately borne of the fact that stakeholders throughout society identify degenerative issues with relation to health and/or the mind as effecting all older individuals equally. Whereas it is invariably true that certain individuals of a more advanced age suffer from senility and Alzheimer’s, to name a few, this does not of course indicate that each and every individual that might be over the age of 65 is inherently less capable, less quick witted, or less able to perform a given set of tasks as compared to younger individual. In much the same way that individual stereotype races based upon the activities of a few, this very same level of bias and prejudice exists in terms of the way in which all people are oftentimes sidelined from positions of authority and importance due to a faulty and ultimately incorrect bias against their contributions and abilities. One particular difficulty to scholars have faced in terms of defining, describing, and measuring ageism has to do with the fact that there is not fundamental agreement on the way that this particular discriminatory practice should be defined. As mentioned previously in terms of racism and/or sexism, clearly defined norms of measurement, approach, and occurrence have been broadly accepted within both academia and the business world. However, due to the fact that ageism is a relatively new consideration that many organizations, businesses, and academics are taking seriously, the means by which a standardized approach to this is taken is inherently lacking (Iweins et al. 339). For instance, one group of scholars indicated the fact that there was extraordinary level of variance between the overall rates of ageism reported within certain parts of Europe as compared to other parts of Europe. Rather than taking this as definitive proof that ageism was definitively worse in one geographic area as compared to the next, the researchers delve more deeply into the statistics and realized that the measurement method by which academics were using to draw inference upon ageism were inherently different between many of these regions (Trusinová 667). Accordingly, it can relevantly be assumed that the overall rate and extent to which ageism exists within many nations and regions around the globe is ultimately under represented as a function of the fact that no clear and definitive agreement exists in terms of what defines ageism and what contributing factors should be considered as relevant. One particularly interesting dynamic that many researchers have come to understand as a function of studying ageism and the means by which it impacts upon human decision-making has to do with the fact that ageism and its prevalence is inherently tied to other “isms” (Stahl and Metzger 201). For instance, researchers have come to understand that the overall ratio of ageism and its overall prevalence is directly and inherently tied to the overall ratio and prevalence of other issues such as sexism and/or racism. Within such an understanding, it can easily be denoted that ageism is quite possibly an outgrowth of human bias and is of course exhibited within situations in which other biases are also denoted (Allen et al. 33). Although not a particularly earth shattering level of understanding, this does allow the researcher to focus on reducing the overall extent to which bias is represented and focus energy upon remediating the root cause of bias and discrimination rather than merely focusing upon seeking to reduce either sexism, racism, and/or ageism. For decades, the focus has been on attempting to ameliorate or reduce one of these three rather than seeking to reduce bias in and of itself (Jyrkinen 177). However, from the information that has been presented within this brief research analysis, it is clear and apparent that seeking to tackle the issue of ageism is not something that lend itself particularly well towards a limited focused. Instead, it will be required that the stakeholders and/or employers in question focus upon reducing inherent human bias as a means of benefiting all of the aforementioned factors and not merely focusing upon a single determinant of human bias (Chonody et al. 253). Essentially, fairness and equity is massively reduced in a situation in which ageism plays a determinant role in the decision-making process. Clear and definitive differentials and human capacity and ability no doubt exist. However, seeking to massively stereotype and quantify the potential of an individual to perform useful contributions based upon nothing more than their age is an egregious violation of the way in which humans should be understood in their individual potential should be engaged. In much the same way that society has moved away from interpreting and individuals that worth as a human being based upon nothing more than skin color, it should also be strongly encouraged and promoted at the same approach should be utilized in terms of age and the prevalence and distribution of ageism. Rather than outright assuming that an individual has outlived their usefulness to a particular organization or group, it should be understood that the individual should be analyzed based upon their own personal contributions and individual qualifications. Not only will this lend a given organization to a more fair and equitable approach towards managing its human resources, it will also increase the overall potential that it is capable from extracting from its stakeholders. Works Cited Allan, Linda J.; Johnson, James A.; Emerson, Scott D. Personality & Individual Differences. Mar2014, Vol. 59, p32-37. 6p. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2013.10.027. Chonody, Jill M.; Wang, Donna; Gerontology & Geriatrics Education, 2014 Jul-Sep; 35 (3): 248-63. (journal article - research, tables/charts) ISSN: 0270-1960 PMID: 24392648, Database: CINAHL Dennis H; Thomas K; Generations, 2007 Spring; 31 (1): 84-9. (journal article) ISSN: 0738-7806, Database: CINAHL Complete Iweins, Caroline; Desmette, Donatienne; Yzerbyt, Vincent; Stinglhamber, Florence. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology. Jun2013, Vol. 22 Issue 3, p331-346. 16p. DOI: 10.1080/1359432X.2012.748656. , Database: Business Source Complete Jyrkinen, Marjut. Scandinavian Journal of Management. Jun2014, Vol. 30 Issue 2, p175-185. 11p. DOI: 10.1016/j.scaman.2013.07.002. , Database: Business Source Complete McMahon, Maureen. In: The Challenges of Aging. 2014, p17-24. Language: English, Database: Gale Virtual Reference Library Nelson, Todd D. Cambridge, Mass : MIT Press. 2002. eBook. , Database: eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) Spedale, Simona; Coupland, Christine; Tempest, Sue. Organization Studies (01708406). Nov2014, Vol. 35 Issue 11, p1585-1604. 20p. DOI: 10.1177/0170840614550733. , Database: Business Source Complete Stahl ST; Metzger A, Gerontology & Geriatrics Education [Gerontol Geriatr Educ], ISSN: 1545-3847, 2013; Vol. 34 (2), pp. 197-211; Publisher: Routledge; PMID: 23383652, Database: MEDLINE Trusinová, Romana. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. Nov2014, Vol. 17 Issue 6, p659-675. 17p. DOI: 10.1080/13645579.2013.823003. , Database: Business Source Complete Read More