Research Revealed: Lost Generation, examination of Gen X and Millennial generations and identification of the parameters for those who don't fit

Do generations matter? Many studies suggest that, at least on a perceptual level, they do. at minimum the plethora of data surrounding the millennial generation and socio-economic or professional-focused articles of interest and concern indicate that generations count - even if their specific impact on ROI, organizational or community development is not able to be counted specifically.

Unlike any prior investigation to date on generations, we sought to conclusively answer questions such as: do they exist? To what extent are they identifiable? Can we measure common values, traits, behaviors, and outlooks? And, arguably most important, “so what”? In examining the parameters of evidence suggesting the presence of a recent Lost Gen, we took a 250 year review of our country and relied on data including: economic, marketing, social, military, domestic and geopolitical, religious and psychological factors. 

With a team of researchers, we gathered mixed-method data; conducted global analysis and defined the parameters to mathematically show regular routine of generations - a common argument used in evidence-based criteria for the existence of generations; we compiled qualitative and survey data collected by each of the 7 co-researchers. Research was conducted over a four year period with a 6 month analysis process occurring in 2017.What we found was surprising:

Every generation has a sub generation that is lost, primarily to war, but the modern Lost Generation is marked not so much by “lost” but by a key finding of being “first” in many regards....

Measurement Focus

Lost Generation was a #research focus group comprised of military veterans, DoD contractors, and civilians (professionals, academics, employees, unemployed and employed) were represented. Based on evidence gathered from hundreds of interviews, personnel findings from thousands of company contributors, data transcripts, and HR testimonies shared over a ten year period from 2005-2015. The concept starts with a very specific framework-focus based on the data that was revealed.

People are most influenced in two stages of early psychological development: formative and normative influences.

While examining #generation and literature the primary indication of a problem was not any of the factors above, instead it was basic common sense.

Generations typically, on average, based on evidence dating back to 1776 came and went every 12 to 24 years with an average of every 17 years over the past 125 years where industrial technology changes were rapid. These changes advanced mans abilities to be connected, travel, mobile, and to build larger, faster, more sturdy. However, as technology developed and arguably “sped life up” we found that the term “millennial” was being used to replace “Nexters” – a term created by marketing agents – and increased the generations length. In fact, millennial was being used until early 2017 when the Society of HR Managers identified a new generation (Gen-Z) having been post-911 births from 2017-2018. This finally "ended" what appeared to be an endless run of a generation defined as millennial. This of course without taking into consideration the speed of living that technology has created - where 12 year old children are interacting in ways (for better and worse) with social-media and friends in way that was once reserved for grown adults (think about it. snap. snap....!)

Every generational period has a "cusp" or two year cross-over at that start and end (a four year swing) through the generation. Of course variables such as parents age, siblings, and many other factors come into focus making measuring generations difficult at best. Regardless, a 30 year time-span This new length showing a millennial generation being born over a range of 30 years was brought down to about 24 years, the max time-period our research revealed.

In fact, at the time of the study in 2013-2017, following four years of data collection, we found that the term millennial was describing those of us whom experienced Columbine shooting (1999), Y2k, 9-11, and became financially destitute as very young adults in the Great Recession to young children of that same time period! Millennial as a term span a description of Generations from 1978-2017 (the common “cusp” as a generation is “Revealed”) to 2016!

Analysis: measuring generations from a common-sense "Start"

To account and control for multiple variables, we established data-sets: broad categories. We then analyzed data-sets against data-points (key events). This data was then cross compared to both national influence and global influence (to account for global economies, markets, technology, and historical events/influences so as to avoid an American-only perspective). To this end, cultural data and evidence from HR departments in global organizations was examined to further capture an understanding of workplace norms, behaviors, problems, and successes with regard to personnel management.

Data-sets included: marketing, economics, sociological, cultural, war, political theory, technology (communication), technology (product), national events, global events, natural disaster.

Data-points: many were considered in the above researched by 5 co-researchers and analyzed over a multiple day member cross-checking process.

It is inconceivable to think that while people were having diapers changed, their generations “first gen” (subculture of every generation per our research) was actively hunting and killing Taliban, being elected to public offices, going bankrupt and homeless. After all, every other generation prior was an average of 17 years. Thus millennial should have started and ended by 1996; Gen Z to 2013; and a new generation well into development born post-recession, post 9-11 and within a world where while in womb they are being exposed to digital waves never before experienced (Note: look at rates of cell phone use by pregnant women and autism).

Fact: Technology sped the world up, as it slowed our emotional and both rational and thinking and emotional-development slowed way, way down.

My team of co-researchers know that this was illogical and in-explicitly untrue if generations actually existed. So we focused less on Lost-Gen, and more on generations as a whole.

Working backwards we established an average of 17 years with a range of 13-24 years. We examined relative life expectancy and defined eras, generations, sub-generations as a framework to measuring the multivariate influences. From this framework, we then looked at a primary "change" that was present in only one-category in long-range eras - the rise of democracy with the foundation of the United States of America (Freedom Era; consider Digital Era, Industrial Era, Enlightenment, dark ages, reformation, etc.)

Freedom (First) Era:

The Freedom Era marked a turning point in the world. Democracy, an experiment.

For the first time, boys and men rushed into battle against an Army and Global force that recruited and created machine soldiers. The Soldiers of the British Empire were faced with economic conditions that to be a soldier meant to be fed and have a purpose - something with honor and opportunity. However, this also meant literally marching into a hail of bullets by order of one man. To refuse was to die, to march forward was an opportunity to live, or to die. Humanity accepted this as a noble right of one man. Humanity accepted this was the necessary price for food and shelter.

But then men and boys volunteered to fight.

Since this time we volunteered once with conscripted soldiers in a period of economic hardship as we grappled with ourselves (Great Civil War of 1860ies), then forced a "TRUE LOST GEN" into war in Vietnam. What we discovered - Americans volunteer, can't be defeated. We may suffer losses, but we are stronger because of the Freedom Era. This presented not only a historical template but a great "First date" to start to analyze the respective data-sets/data-points. In doing so we cross-compared and continued to reduce and eliminate factors to clearly create a system to (in the future) use reliably as a framework for understanding the conscious and unconscious influences of a specific generation.

Creating a guiding start-point we then compared the data forward. The challenge being how do you explain an influence when you may not know an age. What we found is that two age factors have considerable bearing on reported influences of a generation as they age. One major, one minor: Formative and normative (respectively). Using this analysis framework we established an average generation with "4 year cusps" to be 17 years. The loss of life due to natural disaster (global), and war (global), causing a full range of 13-24 years for a generation. The formative and normative experience occurring between this time period.

Normative

In examining generations and the confluence of multiple variables affecting generations, we were able to conclude based on substantial normative and formative indicators the likely existence of an entire generation. Normative development represents the usual pubescent to young adult influences that occur in any Child's life while safe and relatively secure within the homes of their parents. These years primarily govern the ages of 12 to 18; this follows the relative theory of the mind constructs that an individual starts to self-identify with a world after the age of 8-12 whereas prior to this point they are within a "nesting" state and learning to accept surroundings as a safety net.

Formative

Whereas formative years extend to 24 years of age and capture the “eyes wide shut” phenomenon of freedom, intellectual thought, and a period of “firsts” for many young adults (again in each relative category). For now we reference birth years with a general hope we can convince society to look at formative years of influence, however, the relative experience of multiple events makes it difficult to define generations as events unfold, thus making birth year a relative constant for all to use as a reference point. Therefore, we do not change that but encourage retrospective analysis in research to focus on Formative and Normative influences before defining workforce development or social systematic changes for generations and sub-generations.

Here are findings about the

Lost, FIRST-Generation:

·        Birth years of 1978-1986

·        Influenced both formative and normative by 1999 & Y2k fears

·        Normative first as “latch key” siblings and heads of house holds

·        Last graduates of a millennium and first graduates of a millennium

·        Formative year influence by the dot-com-bust era

·        Normative influences for many with the 2007-2013 Great Recession

·        Formative and Normative influence of 9-11, and the ensuring 2011 recession

·        Formative and Normative influence of the 2003 recession

·        Formative and Normative influence of the War on Terror, capture of Saddam.

·        Normative influences of flip phones to smart phones

·        Remains the only generation still in the red from the Great Recession losing an estimated 90% of the generations cumulative wealth with no clear recovery in sight (circa 2017)

·        Remains the first generation to engage a war with more wounded than killed

·        The first to be directly “marketed to as generation nexters”

·        The first to be recognized scholarly, while in normative and formative years, that such concepts of generations existed – thus the first generation in many regards

·        The first generation of Christian “infidels” in the Holy Land in 1000 years as warriors

·        The first generation representing the “Dad Job”

·        The first and only generation to use landlines, emails, pagers and cell phones – not as addicted experts but simply experience using them

·        The first generation to use computers primarily to wage war

·        The first generation to experience online education

·        The first generation to experience a high school shooting (Columbine 1999)

·        The first generation to raise children in the shooting era having once been victim of an otherwise unknown prior phenomenon.

·        The first generation to experience online marketing experiences

And for many, all of this occurred PRIOR to the age of 30, but after the age of 15. In a bye-gone era where 18 meant no home, no insurance, educational-debt and decision-making authority, rent, work, and life; all subsequent generations have had a relative protection to impact and alter the formative and normative experiences.

In reviewing generations we do not replace the standard accepted norms, but propose to add Lost Gen/First Gen to the equation based on three drivers:

·        Silent Generation

·        Greatest Generation (wrongly labeled)

·        Boomers

·        Xers

·        The LOST, FIRST GEN

·        Millennial

Gen-Z to follow....

The drivers: technology, history, and economics (labor and fiscal). The first driver that stood out in out in our four year data collection is that as technology ………

Summary:

This system provides a framework that reduces the many variables of generations to define key national, global normative and formative experiences that can help understand generations from a deep, meaningful, and general basis. Such knowledge, being based in a process of predictive analytics, can be used as a system to establish changes in workplace, economic, sociological and cultural influences. One key element of generations is that within the American culture, the rates of loyalty are consistent within generations, but loyal to what can change. A generation loyal to nation, country and freedom can be followed by a generation loyal to crown, king, and orders (pre-Freedom Era) cultures.

While more work remains, at minimum the establishment of generational factors based on normative (youth) and formative (relative first) create a compelling measurement system to identify generations and relative subcultures. By looking back at birth, one can reasonably then look forward to understand the impact of broad or acute influences on generations in the workplace, labor market, economy and political arenas.

Watch for more in upcoming publications such as "City of Companies" and "Human & BIG Data: linking people, cultures and technology"

?? 2019 | ORCHARD-PRESS, a division of RSolution Publishers & in cooperation with LINKED-IN, Strategic Learning Alliance, and Saber-Mountain Press.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law with specific reference and citation. ANY USE OF THIS CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE AUTHOR, PUBLISHER, OR ASSIGNS IS ILLEGAL.

?#research #humanresources #HR #AI #leadership #leadershipdevelopment #peopleandculture #learning #coach #coaching #certifications #people #HRD