A survey of specialists and managers responsible for employee recruitment and management decisions revealed that more than half (53.4%) of respondents acknowledge the influence of age in various work situations.
Read more Rare antique treasure stolen – but thieves left the most valuable item
Will employee training pay off before their retirement?
A study conducted by the personnel search and selection agency “Emplonet” from June to December 2025 reveals that among respondents whose job specifics or duties are closely related to personnel recruitment and management, more than half (53.4%) indicated that in the past 3 years the age of a candidate or employee could have influenced decisions in work situations.
“Age could have influenced 50% of top-level, 49.2% of middle-level, and 38.9% of lower-level (team or group) managers’ decisions. Although specialists dealing with personnel recruitment and management less frequently, among those who have such powers, the influence of age on decisions also remained noticeable. This was acknowledged by 61.3% of junior specialists (with up to 2 years of experience), 37.7% of experienced specialists (with more than 5 years of experience), and 18.2% of specialists with 2–5 years of experience. However, these results should be interpreted cautiously due to the small sample size,” comments Violeta Jakutė, head of “Emplonet,” on the study results.
Looking more closely at specific work situations, it is evident that respondents most often indicated cases related to assessing a candidate’s suitability. More than 9 out of 10 (94.7%) specialists and managers responsible for employee recruitment and management decisions admitted that age had at least once influenced the consideration of a person’s candidacy suitability. 6 out of 10 respondents (60.2%) noticed the influence of age at least once when distributing daily work tasks or delegating responsibilities.
More than half of those surveyed noticed that age could have influenced decisions at least once regarding termination of employment relationships, decisions during organizational changes, or considerations of promotion or professional growth opportunities (respectively 57.3%, 55.3%, and 53.4%). When considering improving working conditions (e.g., salary increases or flexible working hours), 46.1% of respondents acknowledged the influence of age.
The numbers are complemented by open respondent comments, which help better understand how the age criterion manifests in practice. On the one hand, some respondents revealed still prevalent stereotypes about employees of different ages.
Respondents’ answers repeatedly reflect the view that younger candidates may be seen as lacking experience, while older ones are perceived as harder to integrate into the team and less adaptable to changes. Cases were also mentioned where, when considering candidates, the length of time a person could work until retirement and whether investments in their training and onboarding would pay off were taken into account, especially in cases where preparing a new employee for work takes several years.
On the other hand, the study also revealed positive examples. Some respondents emphasized that their organizations consciously strive to preserve jobs for pre-retirement age employees and evaluate people based on their competencies rather than age.
“Such comments show that organizational attitudes towards age diversity are not uniform – alongside decisions still accompanied by age-related assumptions, conscious efforts to create a more open work environment for employees of various ages are also visible,” says V. Jakutė.
Age is most often assessed at the CV stage
Among respondents whose work is closely related to employee recruitment and management, 40.2% indicated that in the past three years the age of a candidate or new employee could have influenced their decisions in the recruitment process.
Looking more closely at specific recruitment process stages, it is evident that the age criterion most often matters during the initial candidate evaluation. As many as 84% of respondents who acknowledged the influence of age in the recruitment process indicated that they had at least once paid attention to the candidate’s age when analyzing their resume or LinkedIn profile – for example, calculating their age by assessing their graduation year or length of professional experience.
Read more Rising fuel prices hit US airlines: flights canceled and capacity reduced
Age also becomes a significant factor during job interviews – 79.8% of respondents indicated that they had at least once considered it when deciding to reject a candidate because they were “too experienced” or “too young for the team.” The age criterion is less often highlighted when preparing job advertisements – 39.9% of respondents admitted to having at least once used phrases in job postings that could indirectly signal age preferences.
The least influence of age is noticed in the onboarding process of new employees, but even here more than a third of respondents (35%) indicated that they had at least once considered the employee’s age when planning the adaptation process. For example, when creating the onboarding plan for a newly selected employee, they consciously assigned an older/younger mentor, adjusted training materials considering age-related preconceptions (“young – will definitely know and be able to do this”).
“The study results show that the greatest risk of ageism arises at the very beginning of the selection process. Since little is known about the candidate yet, they may be evaluated by employers not only based on abilities but also on preconceptions: that a younger person will not have enough skills, will leave the company sooner, while an older person will be less flexible, learn more slowly, expect higher pay, etc.
Unfortunately, other experimental studies, in which employers receive similar resumes differing only by the candidate’s age, also confirm that older candidates receive interview invitations less frequently,” notes V. Jakutė.
Specialists more often acknowledge the influence of age
Data show that the influence of the age criterion in the recruitment process is more often recorded by specialists than managers. Among experienced specialists, 52% acknowledged this, while among specialists with 2–5 years of experience, 43.2% of respondents did. Meanwhile, among managerial groups, 39.1% of top-level, 33.9% of middle-level, and 33.3% of lower-level managers indicated the importance of age in their decisions.
“These results may not indicate that specialists discriminate more often than managers, but that they more frequently encounter and openly acknowledge the influence of age when hiring employees. Since specialists with recruitment powers usually work in the HR field, it is likely that they more easily recognize manifestations of ageism in selections. Naturally, specialists with longer professional experience may better recognize informal expectations and stereotypes of hiring managers.
Lower response rates among managers do not necessarily mean less frequent influence of age on their decisions. Some managers may tend to rationalize their decisions with socially acceptable reasons (e.g., candidate’s flexibility or lack of technological skills). Part of this influence may be unconscious or consciously undisclosed to create a more favorable impression,” believes the head of “Emplonet.”
The numbers are complemented by open respondent comments, which help better understand how the age criterion manifests in practice. Some respondents drew attention to the business continuity aspect – in organizations with many mature employees, age is sometimes assessed when planning future workforce needs and aiming to reduce the risk that a large portion of employees will leave the organization in a short time.
Situations were also mentioned where age is linked to the nature of specific duties – for example, when selecting employees for physical work, it is often assessed whether an older candidate will find it too difficult to perform physically intensive work or long working hours.
Read more Rolandas Skaisgirys is considering running for the president of «Lithuanian Basketball»
