This study has been conducted to determine the values associated with Industry 4.0 and perceptions toward the concept and meaning of work and to compare the values held by workforce members of Generations X, Y, and Z. The purpose of this research is to provide a better understanding of these concepts and how they differ among the generations.

Various definitions are found in the literature for Industry 4.0. According to Schwab (2017), the emergence of Industry 4.0 involves three key factors: speed, width-depth, and system effect. Some definitions describe Industry 4.0 as the autonomous operation of machines and production systems with the goal of reducing the human workforce (Görçün, 2016), while others define it as the control of physical processes in smart factories through cyber-physical systems that communicate and make decisions independently but under the control of a central system (Soyak, 2017).

The concept of work has evolved over time and undergone numerous changes. In primitive societies, work was primarily a means of sustenance, but as agriculture developed, individuals began to produce excess goods beyond what was needed for their own survival (Sezal, 2014). The feudal system emerged with the advent of agriculture, and the end of feudalism occurred at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. In the last 25 years of the 20𝑡ℎ century, developments in society such as an increase in education and welfare levels influenced individuals’ expectations and led to changes in the meaning of work (Keser, 2005).

Communications and interactions among people have existed since the earliest periods of human history. These interactions and communications reflect the changes and developments that have occurred throughout history. Because changes and developments

continue to happen in every era, individuals born within certain time frames have been grouped into specific generations (Aygenoğlu, 2015), with multiple classifications of generations occurring in the literature. The most widely accepted classifications are as follows: the Silent Generation (1925-1945), Baby Boomers (1946-1964), Generation X (1965-1979), Generation Y (1980-1999), and Generation Z (2000 and later; Reeves & Oh, 2008, pp. 296–297; Crumpacker & Crumpacker, 2007, p. 351; Haeberle et al., 2009, p. 62; Keleş, 2011, p. 131; Kyles, 2005, p. 54; Lancaster & Stillman, 2002, p. 59; Senbir, 2004, pp. 22–26; Yelkikalan & Altın, 2010, pp. 1–2; Kuran, 2014, 2015; Türk, 2013; Twenge, 2013)..

The research has developed a questionnaire with 72 questions and consisting of four sections: demographic questions, theWork and Meaning Inventory (Steger et al., 2011), the Expectation fromWork Life Scale (Jusoh, M, Simun, M., & Chong, S. C., 2011), and the researcher-developed Industry 4.0 Scale. The demographic section includes questions about the participants’ gender, education level, age, employment status, profession, institution, length of service at the institution, position, and time spent in the workforce. The Work and Meaning Inventory used in the second section was adapted to Turkish and tested for its reliability and validity by Akın et al. (2013), who found a Cronbach’s alpha = .93. The third section uses the Expectation from Work Life Scale (Jusoh, M, Simun, M., & Chong, S. C., 2011) which includes separate questions about one’s ideas of an ideal job and current job. The scale was adapted to Turkish by İşmen (2012) and has a Cronbach’s alpha = .89. The fourth section uses a scale regarding Industry 4.0 that was developed by the researchers and has a Cronbach’s alpha = .75.

The questionnaire for this study was created using the online survey site www.smartsurvey.co.uk. Due to the survey being conducted online, stratified sampling was used to ensure easy access to the sample. A total of 435 people were reached, and the data were analyzed using SPSS. The level of significance was accepted as p < 0.05 in the data analysis.

When reviewing the overall study and the analysis results, the common views that had been found in the literature regrading intergenerational differences are not supported. However, this result is consistent with the findings of some studies that found no significant or meaningful differences among generations (Gürbüz, 2015; Costanza, 2012; Kowske et al., 2010; Sackett, 2002). This finding is backed up by literature that suggests the multiple generation theory to not be supported, which posits that different beliefs, values, behaviors, and attitudes are caused by the social, cultural, historical, and political events members of a generation experience during their lifetime (Gürbüz, 2015; Glass ,2007; Inglehart, 1997). This may indicate that popular classifications of generations inspired by the multiple generation theory may not be completely valid in Türkiye (Gürbüz, 2015, p. 52).

This study has limitations in four areas. The first limitation is that the questionnaire was administered online, which means that face-to-face contact was not possible with the sample group and thus they may not have answered the questions honestly or accurately. The second limitation is that the study used a cross-sectional data collection method. In intergenerational studies a longitudinal data collection method may be more useful for identifying differences, as the values, attitudes, and behaviors of generations may change over time. The third limitation is that no existing scale is found in the literature regarding Industry 4.0, and the scale used in this study was developed by the researchers. While the scale includes important concepts related to Industry 4.0 and business life, it could be further developed in future studies. The final limitation is that the study was conducted only with individuals in different age ranges in Turkish society. A more holistic and illuminating study could be conducted in the future with an intercultural research plan.

Future studies could benefit from develop a more comprehensive Industry 4.0 Scale and from conducting studies in cooperation with various companies. This would allow for more widely accepted results to be achieved regarding Industry 4.0.

For future studies, itwould be beneficial to develop a more comprehensive Industry 4.0 scale and to conduct studies in cooperation with various companies. This would allow for more widely accepted results about Industry 4.0 to be achieved.