Does generation Z cope with stress differently? Self-efficacy, coping strategies, and implications for nursing workforce management: a cross-sectional survey study

Because occupational stress is a constant element of nursing work, it affects both staff well-being and the quality of care and team stability. From a management perspective, it is therefore important to understand what resources employees use to cope with stress. The aim of this study was to examine coping strategies and self-efficacy among nurses from different generational groups, with particular emphasis on findings relevant to personnel management. A cross-sectional study was conducted among 760 nurses who were professionally active at the University Hospital, Krakow, Poland, between April 15 and October 15, 2025; the response rate was 63.1%. The study excluded nurses employed in intensive care units, operating rooms, and emergency departments. The instruments used were a sociodemographic and occupational questionnaire designed specifically for this purpose, the Mini-COPE inventory, and the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES). Initial comparisons between Generation Z and a group consisting of Generation Y and Generation X/Baby Boomers were unadjusted. We then conducted a multivariable adjusted analysis of this primary comparison to account for measured sociodemographic and occupational differences, such as professional experience, weekly working hours, additional employment, shift-work status, patients hospitalized per shift and patients per nurse, and type of workplace. Additional sensitivity analyses compared Generation Z separately with Generation Y and Generation X/Baby Boomers. A total of 50.7% of participants belonged to Generation Z; 90.0% of the study participants were women, and 58.8% worked in medical (non-surgical) wards. The highest mean Mini-COPE scores were observed for active coping (mean = 2.13) and planning (mean = 2.09), while the lowest score was observed for substance use (mean = 0.31). The mean GSES score was 29.14 (standard deviation = 4.66). When Generation Z was compared with the older group without adjustment, GSES scores were similar (mean difference = 0.38 points, 95% confidence interval: -0.29 to 1.05). In the adjusted primary analysis, the combined older group had lower GSES scores than Generation Z (β = −1.38, 95% confidence interval: −2.47 to −0.29; q = 0.0250). Separate sensitivity analyses showed similar differences for Generation Y and Generation X/Baby Boomers. In the unadjusted descriptive comparisons, a higher proportion of the older group had additional employment (55.7% vs. 18.4%) and worked more hours per week (49.48 vs. 40.26 hours). In the overall sample, higher self-efficacy was associated with several coping strategies. Generation Z was found to differ from older nurses in the coping strategies used; however, this should not be interpreted as evidence of inherent generational characteristics. Although the cross-sectional design does not fully separate the effects of generation from those of age, period, career stage, and workload, several differences in coping remained significant after adjustment for multiple variables, indicating that they could not be fully explained by the measured sociodemographic and occupational factors. Mentoring, workload monitoring, support for recovery, and protection of work–life balance may be regarded as potential management strategies, but their effectiveness requires evaluation in prospective studies. Not applicable.