LAUSR

In response to the aging workforce, researchers have increasingly identified the need to integrate lifespan developmental perspectives into existing organizational theory. More specifically, researchers have called for an investigation of the various mechanisms through which age affects work-related outcomes and for theoretical frameworks to conceptualize successful aging at work (Ng & Feldman, 2013; Zacher et al., 2018). One such avenue to understanding lifespan development in the workplace, socioemotional selectivity theory (SST), has emerged as a preeminent theory of social and emotional development (Carstensen, 1991, 1992, 2006; Carstensen et al., 1999). Socioemotional selectivity theory provides an explanatory mechanism of how older adults make social choices and addresses the dynamic role of time in predicting the goals that individuals pursue and the social partners they seek to fulfill them (Carstensen et al., 1999). As such, SST offers a theoretical lens to advance our understanding of successful aging at work. The model of successful aging proposed by Kooij et al. (2020) in the focal article builds on Heckhausen et al.’s (2010) motivational theory of lifespan development in which goal engagement and disengagement processes are examined in the context of changing opportunities and constraints that covary with age. Viewing successful aging through the lens of SST enriches the model in the focal article for at least four reasons. First, goal-directed behavior underlies both theories, and each seeks to explain the way in which goal choice informs decisions about the allocation of time and resources. Second, SST complements the theoretical underpinnings of the model because, while the motivational theory of lifespan development outlines the processes of goal engagement and disengagement, SST provides specific goal categories that are influenced by an individual’s future time perspective. Third, given the emphasis on fit-seeking behavior, considering goal type should have a direct effect on the extent to which certain goals lead to perceptions of P-E fit, and these perceptions should vary with age due to its relationship with future and occupational time perspective (Rudolph et al., 2018). Finally, practice recommendations to motivate older workers based on SST offer a way to reduce anticipated or experienced misfit between what an organization supplies and what an aging employee needs. Ostensibly, the consideration and integration of SST offers an avenue to enrich the process model of successful aging presented by the focal article. As such, the overarching goal of the present commentary is to describe research relating to SST, emphasize the role of SST in understanding successful aging at work, and provide specific practical recommendations to enhance P–E fit based on the integration of the process model and SST.