GENERATION Z AND SOCIO-LABOR PLATFORM “WORK 4.0”: INTERACTION IMPERATIVES

Abstract

The study of the social and labor relations of the digital age within the context of the theory of generations and the applied aspects of its use at the present stage, without exaggeration, should lay new foundations for ensuring the sustainability of social and labor development and achieving a new, higher level of social quality on this basis. The lack of systematic, interdisciplinary studies of those facets and aspects that not only reflect, but also explain from a scientific standpoint, on the one hand, unidirectionality, and on the other — the contradiction of the interaction of two phenomena of the present - the social and labor platform “Labor 4.0” and “digital” Generation (Generation Z) confirms the relevance of the topic of the article. The aim of the research is to increase scientific knowledge and to obtain additional arguments regarding the correspondence of the social and labor platform “Labor 4.0” to the possibilities of self-realization of the “digital” generation (generation Z), the coherence of the development of two socially significant institutions, which should contribute to the elabo ration of a roadmap for social and labor development in interrelation with generational trends of the digital age in the future. A fundamentally new result is the scientific argumentation of the interaction between the “digital” generation (generation Z) and the new social and labor reality, which by the author’s concept is presented as a platform “Labor 4.0”, — from the perspective of unidirectionality and contradiction of their development. The authors defend the belief that the platform “Labor 4.0”, on the one hand, gives young people new opportunities, area for self-reali zation and self-expression, on the other hand — creates new challenges, limitations and threats. It has been proven that “Labor 4.0” is a more attractive and receptive institute for Generation Z than for representatives of other generations in the context of adapting to changes that are becoming a norm rather than exception in the new economy’s coordinates. The systematic and interdisciplinary approaches have become the methodological basis of scientific research. General scientific and special methods of scientific researches — theoretical generalization, induction and deduction, abstract-logical, historical and classification, comparative analysis, logical substantiation, hypothetical, — have been used in order to give reasons for the answers to a number of questions put by the authors of the article before the scientists in the area of labor. The basic principles of the theory of generations and scientific and applied aspects of its use in the practice of human resources management have been revealed in order to achieve the set goal. The features of the “digital” generation have been highlighted; the emphasis has been placed the personal, psychophysiological qualities of Generation Z representati ves which are increasingly becoming a part of the total labor force. The variety of characteristics of the platform “Labor 4.0”, which give an idea regarding the new social and labor reality, has been substantiated and outlined. Preliminary investigations of new opportunities and challenges that await Generation Z representatives as a part of the total labor force the platform “Labor 4.0”in have been made.

References:

1. Bolduin, R. (2018). The Great Convergence: Information Technology and the New Globalization. A. Belykh (Ed.). Moscow: Publishing House “Delo” RANHiGS [in Russian].
2. Diton, A. (2016). The Great Escape: Health, Wealth, and the Origins of Inequality. A. Gus’kova, (Trans.). Moscow: In-t Gaidar Publishing House: Liberal Mission Foundation [in Russian].
3. Vallerstajn, I., Kollinz, R., Mann, M., Derlug’jan, G., & Kalhun, K. (2015). Does Capitalism Have a Future? G. Derlug’jan (Trans.). Moscow: In-t Gaidar Publishing House [in Russian].
4. Inglhart, R. (2018). Cultural Evolution: How People’s Motivations are Changing and How this is Changing the World. S. Lopatina (Trans.). Moscow: Thought [in Russian]. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108613880
5. Mejson, P. (2016). PostCapitalism. A Guide to Our Future. Moscow: Ad Marginem Press [in Russian].
6. Milanovich, B. (2017). Global inequality: A new approach for the age of globalization. D. Shestakov (Trans.). Moscow: In-t Gaidar Publishing House [in Russian].
7. Piketti, T. (2016). Capital in the Twenty-First Century. N. Palii (Trans.). Kyiv: Our Format [in Ukrainian].
8. Saks, D. (2012). The Price of Civilization. A. Kalinina (Trans.). Moscow: In-t Gaidar Publishing House [in Russian].
9. Stiglic, Dzh. (2016). Great separation. Inequality in society, or what to do with the remaining 99 % of the population? F.A. Israilova (Trans.). Moscow: JEKSMO [in Russian].
10. Stiglic, Dzh. (2017). The Price of Inequality: How Today’s Divided Society Endangers our Future. Moscow: JEKSMO [in Russian].
11. Uotson, R. (2014). 50 Ideas You Really Need To Know. Sh. Martynova (Trans.). Moscow: Fantom Press [in Russian].
12. Shvab, K. (2017). The fourth industrial revolution. Moscow: JEKSMO [in Russian].
13. Amosha, O.I., Novikova, O.F., Antoniuk, V.P., Zaloznova, Yu.S., & Volovodova O.V. (2014). Social Potential of Sustainable Development: Innovative Mechanisms of Formation and Use. O.F. Novikova (Ed.). NAS of Ukraine, Institute of Industrial Economics. Donetsk [in Ukrainian].
14. Petrova, I.L., & Blyznyuk, V.V. (Eds.). (2016). Social and labor area of Ukraine development: theory, practice, perspectives. NAS of Ukraine; State Institution «Institute of Economics and Forecasting of NAS of Ukraine». Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
15. Heiets’, V.M., Danylenko A.I., & Libanova E.M., et al. (Eds). (2015). Innovative Ukraine 2020. National Report. NAS of Ukraine. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
16. Libanova, E.M. (Eds.). (2016). Human development in Ukraine. Innovative types of employment and prospects for their development. Ptoukha Institute for Demography and Social Studies of the NAS of Ukraine. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
17. Luk’ianenko, D.H., Poruchnyk, A.M., Kolot, A.M., & Stoliarchuk, Ya.M. (2011). Resources and models Global Development. D.H. Luk’ianenko, A.M. Poruchnyk (Eds.). KNEU. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
18. Shevchenko, L.S., Hrytsenko, O.A., Kamins’ka, T.M., Makukha, S.M., & Marchenko, O.S. (2014). Intangible Economy: Intellectual Capital Formation and Use Management. L.S. Shevchenko (Ed). Kharkiv: Right [in Ukrainian].
19. Kolot, A., & Herasymenko, O. (2019). Social and labor development in the XXI century: to the nature of global changes, new opportunities, limitations and challenges. Demography and Social Economy, 1 (35), 97-126. https://doi.org/10.15407/dse2019.01.100 [in Ukrainian].
20. Kolot, A.M. (2019). Work 4.0 as model and platform for new (digital) economy. Proceedings from Employment and Revenue in the Digital Economy: Regulatory Mechanisms, Challenges and Dominants of Development ´19: International Scientific and Practical Conference (October 23-24, 2019), 13-28. Kyiv: KNEU [in Ukrainian].
21. Kolot, A., & Herasymenko, O. (2020). Labor 4.0 concept: theoretical-applicable principles of formation and development. Economy and Forecasting, 1, 7-29 [in Ukrainian]. https://doi.org/10.15407/eip2020.01.007
22. Kolot, A., & Herasymenko, O. (2020). Determinants of formation of social and labor platform “Labor 4.0”. Bulletin of the Carpathian University. Avg. Economy, 15, 125-132 [in Ukrainian]
23. Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (1991). Generations: The history of America’s future, 1584 to 2069. New York: William Morrow and Co.
24. Howe, N., & Strauss W. (2000). Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation. N.Y.: Vintage Books.
25. Zelenov, Ye.A. (2018). Digital generation: risks of, dignities, facilities of cooperation. Spirituality of a Personality: Methodology, Theory and Practice, 5 (86), 67-82 [in Ukrainian].
26. Mannheim, K. (1952). The problem of generations. Essays on the Sociology of Knowled ge. Paul Kecskemeti (Ed.). London: Routledge, 276-322.
27. Pilcher, J. (1994). Mannheim’s Sociology of Generations: An Undervalued Legacy. British Journal of Sociology, 3 (45), 481-495. https://doi.org/10.2307/591659
28. Prensky, M. (2006). Listen to the Natives. Educational Leadership, 63(4), 8-13. Retrieved from http://www.learntechlib.org/p/98775/
29. Korostil’, L.A. (2018). Generation Z: Finding Ways of Pedagogical Interaction. Public education, 1, 82-88 [in Ukrainian].
30. Bojko, V.A. (2013). Patterns of generation at the modern market of labour: cultural determinants and structural differentiation. Bulletin of the Odessa National University. Series: Sociology and Political sciences, 18(3), 31-36 [in Ukrainian].
31. Kaschuk, K.M. (2018). Employee management features of X, Y and Z generations. Eco nomy. Management. Innovation. Series: Economic Sciences, 1. Retrieved from http://nbuv.gov. ua/UJRN/ eui_2018_1_9 [in Ukrainian].
32. Vorzhakova, Yu.P. (2019). Classification of personal risks generation Z. Economic Bulletin of the National Technical University of Ukraine “Kyiv Polytechnic Institute”, 16, 234-241 [in Ukrainian].
33. Giambattista, Vico (1725). Principi di una scienza nuova d’intorno alia comune natura delle nazioni. Naples. Mosca.
34. Condorce (1795). Esquisse d’un tableau historique des progres de l’esprit humain.
35. Becker, H. (Ed.). (1992). Dynamics of Cohort and Generations Research. Amsterdam: Thesis Publishers.
36. Dimock, M. (2018). Defining generations: Where Millennials end and post-Millennials begin. Washhington, DC: PEW Research Center. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch. org/fact-tank/2018/03/01/defining-generations-where-millennials-end-and-postmillennials-begin/
37. Radaev, Vadim (2019). Millennials: How the Russian Society Changes. Moscow: Publishing House of the Higher School of Economics [in Russian].
38. Stillman, Devid (2019 ). Z @ Work. I. Hoial (Trans.). Kharkiv: Publishing “Morning”: “Fabula” [in Ukrainian].
39. Sherry Posnick-Goodwin (2010). Meet generation Z. Retrieved from https://www.cta.org/ en/Professional-Development/Publications/2010/02/Educator-Feb-10/MeetGeneration-Z.aspx.
40. Inglhart, R. (997). Postmodemity: Changing Values and Changing Societies. Policy: Political Studies, 4, 6-23 [in Russian].
41. Hamilton, C., & Breakspear, C. (2004). Getting a life: understanding the downshifting phenomenon in Australia. Discussion Paper, 62.
42. Cochman, R.L. (2015). Leadership, downshifting and the experience of power in high education. Thesis. Sheffield Hallam University. Oct.
43. Kolot, A. (2014). Individualization of personality and formation of individualized society as a phenomenon of the present: implications and lessons to be learned. Ukraine: Aspects of Work, 2, 3-10 [in Ukrainian].
44. Kolot, A. (2014). Global Transformations of Individualised. Societies: Implications and Lessons to Be Learned. The International Economic Policy, 1, 5-22 [in Ukrainian].
45. Kastel’, R. (2009). The metamorphosis of the social question: A chronicle of wage labor. N.A. Shmatko (Trans.). Sankt-Peterburg: Aletejja [in Russian].