The Millennial Organization — From Seismic Upheaval To Balance

[caption id=”attachment_74284" align=”aligncenter” width=”1000"]

Photo credit: Benji :D via Visualhunt / CC BY-NC[/caption]

Co-authored by Evan Mitchell, Director, Love & Wine and Co-founder, Gen Y Brand Specialists HOW&Y

Same river, different waters

Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose — “the more things change, the more they stay the same.” This is an epigram that describes itself. A nod, in a world fixated with change, towards the inevitability of its opposite, unchange.

It’s typically change that gets all the excited press, and has done down the ages. Philosopher Edmund Burke called change “the most powerful law of nature”, prompting an echo in JFK’s “change is the law of life.” Archetypal psychoanalyst Karl Jung aligned the benefits of change with emotional and psychological acceptance. Sci-fi visionary Isaac Asimov called change — “continuing change, inevitable change” — “the most dominant factor in society.” And the late lamented Starman himself, David Bowie in his song “Changes”, celebrated the ineluctability of change in a paean to youth culture and rebellion against elders.

[bctt tweet=”The power and popularity of change, like so many enduring themes, can trace its origins way back to the Classics.” via=”no”]

The Roman poet Ovid named his epic work, Metamorphoses, for the ubiquitous change it celebrated in all things. And this, five hundred years after Ancient Greece’s greatest pre-Socratic philosopher Heraclitus began it all, with his reflection, “you cannot step twice into the same river.”

This famous quote is typically taken as extolling flux over stasis, mutability over stability. However, implicit in those words is as much unchange as change. Yes, the steady coursing of perpetually different currents speaks of the inevitability of change. But the river’s ingrained ways, its banks and the landmarks that line them, and the very acknowledgement in the phrase “the same river,” speak to an equal and counterbalancing permanence.

Same river, different waters.

Change within unchange — and unchange guiding change.

The business end of change (and unchange)

The corporate world has had lots of time to come to grips with the concept of change. Formal studies were occurring from the ’50s within the psychological field of group dynamics. Towards the ’90s, focus on the change phenomenon shifted to the dynamics within organizations, and change has been at the forefront there ever since — to the point where the concept and practice of change management is largely institutionalized and embedded in organization development.

Human needs and expectations, on the other hand, have remained relatively unchanged. Recently a lot of attention has been directed to evidence from psychological researchers (Quoidbach, Gilbert and Wilson) that personal change is something primarily identified with the past more than the future. Yes, the thinking goes, I have changed from my earlier years, but the values, interests and preferences I have now are stable.

If this theory, labelled the “end of history illusion”, is to be believed (and the research has its critics) then pressure to change at a personal level will encounter attitudinal as well as emotional obstacles.

The contrast between the realities of systemic variation across an organization, and the preference for status quo within its human elements, creates a natural tension. The most obvious manifestation of this (as any dog walker would know) is automatic resistance. This response is common enough to be part of organizational folklore. But that scenario is now being turned on its head, with a new generation that claims to be open to, and itching for, change.

The language of change talks in terms of “disruptors”, and specific examples can be found everywhere in the business media. Interesting as these are, to concentrate on this level is to miss the forest for the trees. The greatest source of disruption in the corporate world today is generational. Generation Y has brought us seismic change — in beliefs, mores, social behaviors, loyalties, personal and career expectations, and so much more.

Given its age range and population size, the Millennial generation sits at the intersection of the forces for change and unchange in the commercial world. Temperamentally, Gen Y seems to fit neatly in the change camp. But look past the superficialities and it could equally be seen as an agent for stability.

The fact is, it can be both. Gen Y consumers have torn up the marketing rule book and replaced it with their own, in a paradigm shift that won’t be reversed. That’s an unchanging reality marketers have to face. On the other hand, Gen Y employees could emerge as a force for stability and a resultant boon to workplace motivation and productivity.

Such is the paradoxical nature of the Millennial generation, and the benefits accruing to organizations who take the trouble to understand its motivators.

Significance of Gen Y

[bctt tweet=”Gen Y is the most investigated generation in history.” username=”bizmastersglobal”]

They have been poked, prodded and pored over since long before they began to appear different. But Gen Y is well past the point of being patronized as oddities. Whatever one’s view of this generation, tolerant or critical, it cannot be ignored.

Three factors give this demographic an overwhelming significance.

First of all, its size.

[message type=”custom” width=”100%” start_color=”#FFFFFF” end_color=”#FFFFFF” border=”#fb7200" color=”# fb7200"]In 2015 Millennials passed Gen X as the largest proportion of the American workforce, with Boomers now in third place. And they have now also passed Boomers as the largest population demographic in the US.[/message][su_spacer]

This growth makes Millennials pivotal in two key areas of the economy — employment and consumer sales.

What are we told about them?

Gen Y employee

Most attention has been directed towards Gen Y as employees. Expert opinion here appears driven by social beliefs — veering between opposites.

• indulging their young-at-heart-ness or treating them as intelligent adults;
• fostering ambition or recognising the reality of individual limits and differences;
• accepting dubious loyalty as a challenge or viewing loyalty as a 2-way street.

The relationship between management and Gen Y employees shouldn’t be based on ideology, but on mutuality of interest. Management needs to look past the embroidery factors and concentrate on what is central to the individual. And if that is the embroidery, then step away and allow them to be spoiled elsewhere.

More than any other in history this is a generation that’s persuaded by values. In all the cautionary worries about Gen Y, the irony is that the influence of these values allows more scope than ever for creating a work environment that’s positive to employees and productive to an organization.

Gen Y consumer

Although attracting less attention, Gen Y’s influence over the consumer world has even greater implications for business. A generation driven by values rather than needs is a game-changer for any B2C organization. It means the old marketing model is broken as far as the most significant consumer group is concerned, while remaining intact for earlier generational groups.

As with the predictions and recommendations on the Gen Y employee, much of the commentary on the Gen Y consumer is unhelpful.

We can chart the stages (we can’t call it progress) in marketing attitudes to the Gen Y consumer, since their “agin’ the government” attitude first manifested. Beginning with:

• “nothing to see here, move along folks…”

Still prevalent up to a few years ago, this combination of insouciance and pig-headed denial, has few supporters now, having been quickly replaced by:

• “Of course there are some differences, but nothing we can’t cater for…”

Typically supported by a list of obvious, superficial and campaign-impractical characteristics carrying the subtext, “See, they’re not so different.” But differences continue to emerge, prompting a further, soft admission:

• “Thanks to our research we now understand the differences in Gen Y. Here’s what you must focus on…”

Circa 2015. Followed by another list of (usually five) less superficial but still largely loose and hazy admonitions. When these don’t fly, it’s interpreted as:

• “Too much variation in Gen Y to take a broad marketing approach. We need to break the demographic into age segments (17+, 25+, 30+), and focus on what their needs are likely to be…”

More market research, then, and focus groups, more going around in circles, where progress is measured by progressively smaller roundabouts. More failure to recognize and accept that we’re in the midst of a paradigm shift — not a shift in the rules, but a total reinvention of the game. That this group are not persuaded by the appeals that moved and continue to move previous generations.

[bctt tweet=”Going around in circles creates more circular reasoning, all the while moving further away from reality.” username=”bizmastersglobal”]

So is abdicating the problem to the problem itself. Entrusting Gen Y targeted creativity to creative Gen Y-ers, as some marketers have sought to do, seems like novel progress. The difficulty is “Gen Y don’t usually get Gen Y” . They’re inclined to see the entire generation as a homogenous macrocosm identical to their tight peer-circle microcosm.

This is especially so in the case of those Millennials who stand as both taste-makers and taste-interpreters of their generation — those who work in media and marketing. “It’s increasingly remarked on that these gigs are more and more dominated by white hipster males. They see the world through a narrow and specific prism — inner-urban dwelling, bearded with retro-tats, café-culture by day and hole-in-the-wall bespoke-spirits-bars by night… It’s a legit sub-culture, sure. How dangerous, though, to have this singular mindset increasingly influential in defining Gen Y tastes and creating the messages aimed at mass-generational appeal.”

CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE (BELOW)

What does this mean?

There are consequences for organizations in not understanding this new generational dynamic. More dead ends. More wrong decisions that waste time, and worse.

HR policies based on a misconception of Gen Y as employees will lead to short and long term problems. Having square pegs in round holes disrupts the smooth functioning of an organization. And of course the further up the management pole, the greater the disruption. This problem has always existed. Previous generations, however, were more malleable. They were neither as insular in their views nor as driven by intrinsic values as Gen Y.

A more dangerous outcome occurs when Gen Y consumer values are misunderstood. It extends from misdirected marketing campaigns, to having the wrong products or services on offer. This can be disastrous on any number of levels. When marketing to Gen X or Boomers, wrong messages tend just to fall on deaf ears — no sale, but no enduring damage.

Millennials, amped up by tech and the urgency of their own opinions, are not as charitable. Naff and cack-handed attempts to engage them invariably result in a backlash. Inadvertent alienation of this kind can doom a product or service for this demographic. And the organization may not even be aware of the error, or its ongoing implications.

In a previous article we noted how traditional representations of motherhood have overdosed on “nurturing”, with motherhood usurping all other aspects of personality and femininity. Fifty years of homemaker and child-carer messages seem to say, “You are a mother, not only first and foremost, but last and everlastingly.” For many Millennial mothers this is not a benign mistake but an offense to the generational claim to omnipotentiality –I can be / do anything.

Gen Y mothers are not about to cede all other facets of their image and identity to motherhood. (Neither, for that matter, are Gen Y fathers going to sacrifice “peak-ME” to the societally coded appraisal of fatherhood.) They want due consideration of their enduring appeal/seductiveness/aspirations/tastes/individuality/uniqueness/quirkiness.

“They want it from their partners, and even from their kids. They want if from friends and social media contacts. And they want it big time from any brands that wish to engage with them as mothers.”

When attempting to engage with Gen Y, marketers should be wary of any traditional or conventional themes and messages, irrespective of how creatively they’re presented or how persuasive their track record. The only messages that will resonate with this consumer demographic are those that appeal to or reflect Millennial values.

This apparent impediment can be turned to advantage.

Millennial employee or consumer — it’s the same challenge

The key to anticipating Gen Y responses, whether as employees or consumers, is the same. It lies in understanding:

• the forces that created this generation
• and the values that drive Gen Y decision-making — be that lifestyle or occupational.

The forces that created Gen Y

As we’ve demonstrated in numerous articles, this generation isn’t just different. It’s singular, with defining oddities and idiosyncrasies that can’t be catered for within existing rule books. Unlike their predecessors, they are the accumulated outcome of five dynamics.

A shift in educational focus — from achievement to self-esteem

It has long been accepted as an article of faith that youth self-esteem is a benefit to society. When this premise was applied to educational practice in the 1980s, it seemed a worthy and logical extension. Why wouldn’t a focus on self-esteem in the classroom also carry through into improved student performance? Unfortunately, ample evidence shows that it didn’t. Instead, severing the causal connection between achievement and self-esteem encouraged the belief by Millennials that they are living in a world of infinite possibilities and entitlement.

A parallel shift in vocational focus — from accomplishment to celebrity

In the old order of things celebrity was a reward for accomplishment. Nowadays however, celebrity has become the accomplishment. Never in human history has celebrity been so casually defined, nor so easily attained, by so many. With the advent of reality shows, bloggers and internet “influencers”, and those famous for just being famous, celebrity now appears a realistic goal for the “ordinary” person hankering to appear extraordinary.

The line is now blurred between celebrity and accomplishment. The willingness to see one as legitimate as the other, is a deep seated belief within Gen Y that affects behavioral choices.

Traditional “vertical modelling” in patterns of maturation (based on parents) replaced by “horizontal modelling” (peer group) and “diagonal modelling” (celebrities)

History has traditionally reinforced societies in which the young are nurtured to maturation by parents. And the parents — along with, perhaps, some inspiring Dead Poets Society kinds of teachers — by their example, shaped youth expectations of their own eventual maturity. This tradition may not be quite as dead as those dead poets, but it’s been watered down substantially, with peer groups and favored celebrities now the overwhelmingly dominant influences.

Gen Y will readily change lifestyle tastes — in bars and clubs, fashion, mags, music — on the recommendation or behavior of a friend or peer group. Examples of this are everywhere and obvious. And major life changes — shifting to a vegan or paleo diet, adopting specific social causes, even the kind of romantic partner to aspire to — can be prompted merely by the impetuousness of admired celebrities.

The emergence of social media as social life

Whether social media has taken over social life or social life has absorbed social media is a chicken and egg question whose answer cannot be known. But the actuality is clear. It’s on display in any Gen Y environment, irrespective of the subculture. It hasn’t happened, if it hasn’t been shared.

Relationships are the pivot. Through the magic wand of social media, unreal relationships become real. Connections that don’t actually exist acquire the traction and influence that many real physical relationships can only aspire to.

Technological saturation from childhood — tech as both means & end

The means and ends of technology for Millennials are now indistinguishable. Marshall McLuhan’s provocative maxims — “the medium is the message / the medium is the massage / the medium is the mess age” — have come full circle.

Technology really does invade life, and radically disrupts the way Gen Y do even superficial things.

These then are the five dynamics that made the Millennial mindset –

• self-esteem — and the rise of entitlement
• celebritization — and its fame-fascination spinoffs
• psychological modelling — of peers and celebs rather than authority figures
• relationship dominance — social currency is to Millennials as $s are to GDP
• technological saturation — tech as both means and end.

Most importantly from an organizational viewpoint, these five dynamics find their expression in a range of values that direct Gen Y choices.

Gen Y values

This is a population grouping that is both homogeneous and heterogeneous — the same yet varied.

The sameness within Gen Y occurs in the general adherence to three intrinsic values.

• Image
• how the world sees me.
• Identity
• how I see myself.
• Omnipotentiality
• I can be / do anything.

These three values can be assumed to apply across Millennials.

The variety within the generation occurs in the varied adherence to a range of aspirational values, often apparently contradictory. We’ve identified twenty of these values — ranging from pop-cultural relevance to style and sophistication, from innovation to own traditions and heritage. All are varyingly influential in Millennial decision-making — particularly for lifestyle choices.

Finally, allied to the intrinsic and aspirational values are three broad characteristics.

Millennials

• stay longer for younger
• keep their options open
• are socially tribal.

These mark overall trends in Gen Y behavior, rather than predict individual choices.

Where from here?

Anticipating how Gen Y will respond in particular situations is the key to getting the best out of them — as employees or consumers.

The universality of the intrinsic values makes them a core part of any Gen Y employee or consumer strategy. But it’s the aspirational values that offer sharper targeting.

Employees

For the organization recruiting Gen Y employees (more and more a given), knowing which aspirational values are significant to individuals provides a head start to managing them successfully — in their interest and the company’s. Particularly if these preferred values can be matched against organizational ideals and aspirations.

Consumers

We’ve highlighted in a number of articles the marketing errors that have occurred, and occur still, in various product and service consumer areas with respect to this demographic.

The solution is to match product or service characteristics to the relevant Gen Y values, and build the creative from there — understanding the generational psyche sufficiently well to avoid the twin fatal errors of irrelevance and (even worse) alienation.

Different waters, same river

[bctt tweet=”Gen Y’s simultaneous heterogeneity and homogeneity make them potentially treacherous to engage with. “ via=”no”]

Their simultaneous significance as a consumer demographic and recruitment pool makes efforts at such engagement inevitable and necessary.

Getting it right (in either, or ideally both) means stealing a march on your own competitors. Getting it wrong…?

The new paradigm shift in marketing that Gen Y represents should not, however, mean throwing the baby out with the bath water (or, back to Heraclitus, throwing the whole damn river out with the metaphor).

The change this generation represents can be harnessed to provide a balance in both brand and employee loyalties. Only, though, for those organizations who take the trouble to understand them, and can keep a dual eye on universal human constants, and the dynamism required to keep re-inventing and refreshing these.