When Business Knows Better but Does Worse: The Ageism Paradox
Is it just us, or are others also noticing a widening gulf between the increasing release of research urging us to drop ageist attitudes considering the ageing demographic phenomenon and continuing company behaviour perpetuating ageist business practices in their everyday operations? This observation occurred on the day we were reading the latest McKinsey report exploring the consequences of the new demographic reality and then came across a LinkedIn post from a well-respected and seasoned business manager providing Interim Executive candidates to industry. This manager was urging his candidates to embrace their grey hair and not succumb to trying to appear ‘younger’ in the face of and we quote ‘rampant ageism within Australian business’.
We couldn’t agree more with this practitioner in terms of his counsel and perspective. His key point is that ‘grey hair’ is the candidate’s competitive advantage as it reflects a deep experience and capability in being able to deliver tangible business outcomes to potential clients. We would only add that the performance contributions of ‘grey hair’ employees to a business remain equally valuable irrespective of whether an organisation chooses to use them in an interim or permanent capacity.
Now, we appreciate that proving ageism remains an organisation blind-spot within Australian industry is not demonstrated by a single anecdotal observation, however this comment has not only been repeated in different versions to us since we began producing our Newsletter but also accords with our earlier PhD research as well as AHRI and Australian Human Rights Commission research data. What we are challenged with is why the anti-ageism evidence is not resonating with business leaders including senior HR practitioners and the C suite?
The Demographic Shift Evidence Continues to Grow
Before digging further into this issue, a quick overview of the major take-outs of the latest McKinsey report will again reinforce the macro-level urgency of adapting our thinking about ageing. This report confirms much of what we already know in the ageing demographic space. However, in new analytical insights, the report discusses if improving productivity and economic growth remain critical future government goals, then AI will not be the ‘silver bullet’ solution industry might imagine it to be, and the embrace of the older worker will be required as a critical complementary requirement. The McKinsey insights garnering headlines include:
The world reached its maximum number of annual births in 2012 and falling fertility rates are now propelling major economies toward population collapse in this century.
The inverting of age structures—from pyramids to obelisks—as the number of older people grows and the number of younger people shrinks.
Consumers and workers becoming increasingly older in the developing world. Seniors will account for one-quarter of global consumption by 2050, double their share in 1997.
Existing Government budget structures cannot support historical income and retirement norms—something must give. In confronting the consequences of demographic change, societies are entering uncharted waters.
The sobering conclusion of McKinsey’s demographic analysis is that if no action is taken, younger people will inherit lower economic growth and shoulder the cost of more retirees, while the traditional flow of wealth between generations erodes. You can hear the intergenerational inequality drumbeat becoming even louder. McKinsey recognises long-standing work practices and the social contract must change.
Coincidentally, as we were absorbing the implications of the McKinsey report, the World Economic Forum Report released a separate report on creating a new and sustainable longevity economy. The report again confirmed how unprepared society is for the significant demographic shift underway, echoing McKinsey’s view that the traditional balance between the years spent in productive employment and retirement is rapidly becoming unsustainable.
However, rather than adopting the gloomy tone of the McKinsey report, the World Economic Forum provided a more positive approach acknowledging demographic change offered many social and economic upsides if only we are all willing to take on the challenge. The report’s foundational point is that the idea of an ageing society as an economic and financial burden needs to be reframed with the development of a longevity economy offering the opportunity of a multi-stage life. We need to rethink how people can contribute to society at all stages of life and be supported in economic roles over time.
The World Economic Forum report declares the world is at a pivotal point, one where society still has an opportunity to proactively address this seismic demographic transition and co-design an environment promoting intergenerational equity and harmony. Tellingly, the report notes a profound public debate about the future implications of demographic change and the opportunity to develop a new economic model centred around longevity has been largely absent from global discourse.
We suggest two critical contributors to this increasing gulf between the need to adapt our thinking to embrace the impacts of demographic change and the stubborn maintenance of ageist behaviour within business is an outcome of a lack of political and company director leadership. We accept this might be an easy ‘potshot’, however in the absence of a substantive and transparent embrace of this challenge by Governments and Board Directors, our PhD research reveals that business managers and HR professionals will not change their existing negative attitudes and behaviours towards older workers as there is no professional reward for changing their outlooks and increased career risk in challenging the prevailing status-quo.
Australian Politics – Can we get the adults back in the room?
We have known about the demographic ageing trend within Australia and its potential implications to government finances since Peter Costello’s first Intergenerational Report in 2002. Yet politicians have chosen to largely ignore the issue and continue to do so.
We have previously argued in our newsletters that a major political innovation to changing attitudes to ageing would be the creation of a Federal Government Longevity Management cabinet role. On reflection, we now believe there is an even more important first step - the need to build a reform case to address the implications and opportunities presented by demographic ageing, including framing generational equality management issues within this larger context. The commencement of a transparent and adult conversation on these issues in Australia is long overdue.
This change of thinking is inspired by an encouraging display of political leadership by the current UK Government with its Inquiry into an Ageing Society which began in March this year. The Economic Affairs Committee has launched an inquiry to investigate the impact of ageing on the UK economy, the opportunities and challenges the Government needs to consider given the demographic trends, the policies necessary to adapt to this future and the broader behavioural changes that may be required. This inquiry is broad ranging and will explore factors including birth rate issues, the role of immigration, required changes to the workforce to support an ageing population, initiatives to increase workforce participation of older individuals, specific policies to address the needs of younger people, understanding the role of technology (including AI) in driving productivity improvement and finally identifying any issues relating to intergenerational fairness raised by a shift towards an older population.
This political strategy represents a clever way to create awareness and education around the demographic ageing issue and begin a public dialogue ideally to improve understanding of its potential implications. Hopefully, such a process acts to reduce community ignorance and fear about the ageing phenomenon, creating an environment that supports meaningful policy reform in this space.
We see a Federal Inquiry into an Ageing Society as a major political opportunity for the returned Labor Government. However, Labor’s landslide win, might once more restrict its appetite to embrace such an issue, given the supposed political need to honour the mandate the public have given it for this parliamentary period. However, industry sectors directly experiencing the impacts of an ageing population on their financial performance might ‘lobby’ the government to become more active in addressing population ageing. We observe business pressure is building in the superannuation industry to address the ageing population issue. Industry funds are worried that as their members retire, they will have to shift from "wealth building" to "income paying", potentially creating financial exposure risks. Some of the major funds are now advocating for better retirement products and aged care infrastructure to future-proof their investments.
This leads to our next major obstacle to change, the unwillingness of Executive Boards to show leadership in adapting their organisations to take advantage of the ageing demographic phenomenon.
Australian Corporate Leadership – Can we get Boards to think ahead?
Many Australian company boards (to be fair, like boards in a lot of other countries) appear either not to be currently reacting to global ageing trends or if they are, doing it at a glacial pace. The lack of awareness or urgency in tackling the business implications of population ageing are understood as outcomes of financial myopia, personal bias and a lack of external regulatory or investor pressure to change.
The continuing short-term focus of Boards on prioritising financial performance and shareholder returns appears to be blinding many to how ageing populations are reshaping markets and will reshape talent pools and business models. Personal bias might also be influencing outlooks with an outdated perception still existing in boardrooms that younger workers are more valuable — more innovative, adaptable, or tech-savvy — despite research showing diverse, multigenerational teams often perform better.
Recent UK research has revealed ageist attitudes are significantly influenced by a person’s sex and education. A 2024 UK Centre for Ageing Better survey revealed a quarter (24 per cent) of 2,057 people polled felt hiring workers over 50 was not a smart business decision. The research highlighted notable differences between men and women with men tending to hold more ageist views. The survey also found that individuals with higher educational qualifications held more ageist views.
Perhaps the existence of an ageist bias at the Board level in Australia might not be unexpected considering this survey’s insights. A 2024 average profile of the typical board member of an Australian ASX-listed company revealed the person to be male; white; around 62 years of age; holding an undergraduate degree, possibly with an MBA or PhD; and experienced in finance, mining or legal management. Maybe this predominance of a well-educated masculine presence within the Board operating environment is restricting a diversity of thinking to address emerging global issues? We maintain, there is a need for new skills at the Board table to help understand the potential of the ageing consumer and age-inclusive workforce management trends.
A lack of regulatory or investor pressure to change corporate behaviour also contributes to Board behaviour. Unlike climate risk or diversity management (where there's regulatory and investor pressure to act), ageing demographics aren't yet heavily regulated or reported on in Australia. Without any risk of either personal or corporate reputational damage, by choosing to ignore the ageing phenomenon, our research reveals senior business leaders will preference status-quo management practices over a desire to display reform behaviours.
We would see good corporate governance practice as a well-functioning Board prioritising the ageing demographic as a critical strategic business issue and behaving in the following manner:
Regularly reviewing demographic shifts just like they review economic forecasts or technological trends.
Establishing board-level KPIs for age-diverse hiring, re-skilling, and senior employee retention as part of a people management strategy rethink.
Acknowledging the spending power of older consumers by pushing management to adapt or create new offerings for this demographic.
Enforcing avoidance of ageist stereotypes within company marketing brands and a focus on how older people enjoy active, tech-savvy, socially engaged lives.
Facilitating scenario planning exercises where half the workforce or half the customers are aged 50+ to help anticipate risks and opportunities.
Actively collaborating with government and industry forums to assist in the shaping of age inclusive retirement, aged care, and workforce policies.
It’s Never as Bad as it Appears or as Good as it Seems
There is a fine line between presenting as alarmist or encouraging a more urgent address of an emerging phenomenon. We understand all published materials have agendas behind them.
In currently dealing with the ageing demographic challenge, we are reminded of the old sporting analogy to explain either poor or fantastic performance - it’s never as bad as it appears or as good as it seems. We think this is sage advice. However, we’ll continue to push for an increasing need for urgency at political and corporate board levels to begin our transformation to a longevity economy. There is a need for increased community awareness. There is a need of major policy reform. There is not a need for alarm.
Not sure how to get started? We can help you understand the business opportunities the emerging 50 years and over age group could represent and the questions your senior managers should be asking to take advantage of this change.
We’re happy to speak to your organisation on the business case for older workers and how to make age-inclusive teams’ work. It's a winning proposition for your organisation.
References
Hessell, T (2021). ‘Talent and Age: How Do Human Resource Manager Meanings of Talent Influence Their Perceptions of Older Workers?’ PhD Thesis. University of Newcastle.
McKinsey Global Institute (2025). Dependency and depopulation? Confronting the consequences of a new demographic reality (January)
Mayne, M. (2025) ‘Quarter of people believe hiring workers over 50 is unwise for business, survey reveals.’ People Management (27 January). https://www.peoplemanagement.co.uk/article/1903904/quarter-people-believe-hiring-workers-50-unwise-business-survey-reveals
UK Parliament Committee (2025) Preparing for an ageing society inquiry launched
World Economic Forum (2025). Future-Proofing the Longevity Economy: Innovations and Key Trends White Paper (March)
