Working in fours: generational communication in the emergency department

Mindi Guptill; Ellen Reibling; Tammy Phan; Bryant Khoo; Stephen Lin; Corbin Donham; Cheryl Wang; E Lea Walters

doi:10.1186/s12245-023-00536-7

Working in fours: generational communication in the emergency department

Int J Emerg Med. 2023 Sep 13;16(1):58. doi: 10.1186/s12245-023-00536-7.

Authors

Mindi Guptill¹, Ellen Reibling², Tammy Phan², Bryant Khoo³, Stephen Lin², Corbin Donham⁴, Cheryl Wang⁵, E Lea Walters²

Affiliations

¹ Department of Emergency Medicine, Loma Linda University School of Medicine, Loma Linda, CA, USA. mguptill@llu.edu.
² Department of Emergency Medicine, Loma Linda University School of Medicine, Loma Linda, CA, USA.
³ Pomona Valley Hospital Medical Center, Pomona, CA, USA.
⁴ Western Michigan University Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Kalamazoo, MI, USA.
⁵ Loma Linda University School of Medicine, Loma Linda, CA, USA.

Abstract

Background: This study examined the conflicts between different generations working in US emergency departments (ED). We sought to record generational differences involving communication preferences, perceived areas of conflict, work motivations, and attitudes regarding work-life balance.

Methods: We developed a survey to assess the physician perspective on generational conflict in the ED. The survey was distributed to members of the American College of Emergency Physicians, a professional organization comprising emergency medicine physicians in the USA.

Results: We received 696 completed responses. Men represented 60% of respondents and the largest proportion of respondents were emergency physicians working in community settings (53%); 11% were residents. Generation representation was smallest for Traditionalist (2%) and largest for Gen X (43%). Seventy percent reported observing conflict due to generational communication with the largest frequency being once a week (26%). In the associated open-ended questions, 247 (33%) provided 316 anecdotal descriptions of observed conflict. Responses clustered into seven themes (ordered by frequency): Work Ethic, Treatment Approach, Technology Application, Entitlement, Professionalism, Work Life/Balance, and Communication Style. Comparing Work Ethic responses, 52-70-year-olds reported that younger providers are less interested in "accomplishing anything" while 26-34-year-olds resented that attitude. Respondents completing the open-ended questions regarding preventing and responding to conflict provided some insight into helpful strategies including actions supportive of clear communication and standardized policies and expectations. Only 5% of respondents reported that they had discussed generational communication in department meetings with the odds of a woman reporting conflict being less than males (p = .01).

Conclusion: Conflicts in the ED in the USA can be attributed to how an individual views the values of someone from another generation. Understanding the frequency and areas of generational conflict in the ED can help medical leaders find strategies to mitigate negative workplace interactions.

Keywords: Communication; Emergency department; Generation.