After making a video about Millennials and another about Generation X, I’ve gotten
a lot of comments asking why we divide people into generational groups at all.
How is a Boomer born in 1946 attributed the same generational characteristics as a Boomer
born in 1964?
That’s a fair question.
Let’s get into it.
You’re watching FutureNow, videos about the future of tech and society.
As in my previous video on this topic, I want to be clear that I’m speaking from an American
perspective, because as you’ll see, generational breakdowns are very much influenced by culture
and thus different regions of the world that have different lived experiences will not
have the same names for social generations.
There are names for generations going back further than the Baby Boomers, such as the
Greatest Generation who fought in World War II and grew up during the Great Depression
and the Silent Generation which followed.
But all of the Generations before the Baby Boomers were actually named retroactively,
because Boomers kicked off this whole naming of generations trend.
Following World War II, there was a boom in the birth rate as Americans felt confident
that the newly strong economy would allow them to raise multiple children and suddenly
demographers, economists, and advertisers felt a need to label this group to better
understand them.
Why?
Because such a big spike in babies would continue to have ripple effects across the economy,
society, and culture of the country for years to come.
Every major milestone this group reached had big implications – for example when Boomers
started reaching car buying age, suddenly car sales would go up, when they were of age
to attend college, enrollment skyrocketed, and of course eventually Boomers became the
largest voting bloc and therefore dictated much of government policy.
According to William Strauss and Neil Howe’s generational theory
there’s a new generation of people every 20 or so years that create
a new social, political, and economic climate and they’re tied together by three key markers:
1) Their relative age during a major moment in history and the social trends during that time.
2) The beliefs and behaviors they share by virtue of being raised around the same time.
and 3) Their “buy in” to being a part of their generation by being aware of commonalities
shared with people in their group.
It’s much easier to study and follow trends in a group of people if you are able to label
them – especially if you’re an ad agency, which arguably are the main force behind the
naming of generations.
In fact, you can find several tips online for “Generational Marketing.”
The main reason for this is that … it works.
As much as many people don’t want to believe that ads targeted at them because of their
age are effective, more often than not they are and were particularly useful before the
rise of Big Data in which companies can now micro-target individuals through Facebook,
Instagram, and well, YouTube.
By focusing on an age group, market researchers can do cohort analyses, meaning following
a group and their change in behavior and opinions through their life-cycle.
That way researchers can differentiate what a particular generation thought and how they
behaved in their youth vs. how they think and behave in adulthood – and can also compare
this to other generations at those stages.
So, basically, we have to deal with the constant barrage of noise about Baby Boomers, Millennials,
and Gen Z-ers so that companies can produce better-targeted Instagram ads for their terrible
smartphone games.
But Strauss and Howe’s generational theory goes even further than that – they claim
that generations follow a cycle of four distinct eras – The High, in which institutions are
strong and individualism is weak and so society generally agrees on the direction they’re
heading in.
This is followed by The Awakening, wherein people wake up and realize actually institutions
are kinda terrible and they want to take back their independence.
Then comes The Unraveling, when institutions are heavily weakened and individualism is
soaring as people enjoy their newfound autonomy, which ultimately leads to The Crisis which
is a time of war and revolution leading to creation of new institutions built on the
values of the generation currently in power.
If the Baby Boomers were at The High in the so-called Golden Age of Capitalism, Generation
X rebelled during their Awakening, Millennials fully embraced their individualism and grew
up in the midst of growing culture war during the Unraveling, then we are now in The Crisis
era as public sentiment is more divided than it has been in a long time, confidence in
institutions like The White House and Congress are at an all-time low, and we’re beginning
to seriously contend with the consequences of climate change.
I suppose by this theory, though, we’re due for a new High and a reboot of the cycle
in the next decade presuming we can make it through this Crisis and get back on track.
Despite the sort of fatalistic nature of this theory that we’re doomed to repeat this
cycle, it’s sort of nice to have some hope for a coming High in the midst of a Crisis.
As a Millennial, though, I feel it’s my job to continue being cynical and only cautiously
optimistic despite running a channel focused on discussing the future.
Let me know, does this all make sense now?
Are you more confused and annoyed with generational naming now?
And most importantly, did you hit the bell to be notified of my next video?