Palace of Versailles
The best part of learning history is realizing how much of what happened in the past echoes in events and decisions of our own day. Last week Ken Burns’ new documentary series, “Prohibition,” spelled out the unintended consequences of a well-meaning effort to fight an alarming social ill. The sad lesson about what happens when we attempt to ‘legislate morality’ still resonates.
A Turning Point in the French Revolution
I just learned that one event in 1790, over a year after the storming of the Bastille, turned out to be pivotal in securing the gains of the Revolution. This event, related in Paris: Capital of Europe by Johann Wilmm, seems eerily reminiscent of the current gatherings on Wall Street:
[On the morning of October 5] “A large gathering of people and unusual excitement filled the square in front of the Hotel de Ville, when several large groups of women, who had gathered in the districts, began to arrive; they asked to be admitted to the Hotel de Ville and stated that they wished to speak to the mayor and representatives of the Commune to inform them that they had decided to march to Versailles. They added that they would not permit any men to join them.”
This spontaneous movement of women had no leader and no demands, just a sense that something was not right.Ultimately, the National Guard did join the women’s march, and the rest as they say, “is history.” The author writes:
“In the revolutionary history of Paris there had not been, nor was there ever again, anything like that mass action of October 5. All of Paris went to Versailles – for reasons that varied greatly – and saved the Revolution by bringing the king back to Paris in triumph.”
On the evening of October 5, Louis XVI gave his written agreement to the decrees issued by the National Assembly between August 4 and 11. Not many hours earlier he had said he would never consent to these regulations. Furthermore, Louis agreed to move back to Paris, and so did the National Assembly. They all set out on October 6 and that evening the king in Paris “as a prisoner of his people.” Three years later in 1793 he was executed, as every 8th grader knows!
The Modern Day Parallel
Fast forward two centuries and we see some startling parallels between the October Parisian women’s march of 1790 and the October Occupy Wall Street events of 2011. Could this leaderless, demandless group ultimately do what no political party has yet accomplished? We will see. But meanwhile, I think it is foolish of politicians and pundits to dismiss it. Something is not right, and the people know it. If there was a King Louis in New York, he would be on his way to Washington.
Millennials (Finally?) On the Move
Collectively, marketers know Millennials are a potent force. They are a large cohort, more homogenous than older cohorts due to their relative similarity in life stage and upbringing, and uniquely empowered through technology to ensure their voices are heard. What has been more surprising up until now is why they haven’t mobilized. I speculated in the past that it may be that they are less comfortable advocating on their own behalf than that of others. Now that the economy has given them a big enough cause, the time may have come for them to mobilize.
It is characteristic of Millennials that their movement is relatively calm, leaderless and still collaborating on its agenda. It may take a while for them to find their voice, but once found it is sure to be heard.
In fact, it is precisely their lack of unity and singular demands that may be its greatest strength, just as it did the Parisian women of 1790. Beka Economopoulous, an unofficial media spokeswoman for Occupy Wall Street, told the International Business Times that she feels the lack of one specific demand actually gives the movement more strength.
Much of the media attention on Occupy Wall Street has centered on the lack of singular demands and unification amongst the hundreds of protesters camped out in Zuccotti Park. “The longer the occupiers don’t have demands, the stronger they are,” said Economopoulous, a vice president at Fission Strategy, a social media company specializing in strategies for nonprofits and foundations. “I don’t believe there will be a stand on one particular reform that we want to see happen. We believe the system is fundamentally broken.”
According to one young marcher, the Occupiers want to preserve a system where everyone has an opportunity to pursue their dream which now seems corrupted. The writer, Dax Devlon-Ross, claims that the movement is actually inspired by the death of Steve Jobs and his widely circulated Stanford commencement speech:
It may not seem that way today, but in the beginning nobody wanted to listen to the Occupiers either. Even now most of us still won’t allow ourselves the permission to dream of a world without widespread greed and corruption. Most of us are still resigned to just getting a piece of the pie. It’s understandable. Corruption and disillusionment rob our faith and steal our dreams.
This is where Steve Jobs fits in. In a rightly celebrated 2005 Stanford commencement address that has been viewed on Youtube some 10,000,000 times, Jobs talked about the inevitability of death and the urgency of life:
Your time is limited, so don’t waste it living someone else’s life. …
Occupy Wall Street is fundamentally about breaking free of the dogmatic thinking and policy making that has resulted in a wildly unjust social and economic order.
More than Just Millennials
I’m not sure what the modern day parallel would be to the National Guard of 1790, but given the mood of the country it may not be long before others join the young marchers.
According to Pew Research, it’s not just Millennials who feel this way. A recent report eloquently spells out a high degree of disillusionment with the system, and a sense that it no longer works fairly for everyone.
- Fifty-four percent of Americans believe “businesses make too much profit”.
- Forty-seven percent believe Wall Street ‘hurts [the economy] more than it helps.”
What’s more, Pew says these attitudes do not divide cleanly along partisan lines. I also suspect they do not reflect age differences. Many trends that started with Millennials sparked change in other generations. Why not this one?
Millennials define themselves more by their interests and passions than their careers or even technology. The desire to connect with brands that share their passions is a key motivation, both online and offline.
Consequently, identifying and understanding Millennial passions is an important first step in designing effective marketing programs.
Last week the Kansas City-based agency, Barkley, shared new research that shows Millennials have a greater range of activities they are passionate about than those over 35. Significantly, Milennials are more likely to define success in personal terms and to put greater importance on it than older generations. “Seventy-nine percent* define success as “doing what you are passionate about“. Today’s youth are not influenced by money or the image of success. In fact, even in their online communities, only 6% feel that “having lots of friends on Facebook” is an influential quality. The vast majority believe “Being True To Yourself” is inherently more influential in life (62%).” *
Millennials want to be defined by their passions, not their careers.
Last week I moderated a panel at the conference Barkley sponsored to reflect on the findings of their research and its implications for marketers, “Share.Like.Buy” in San Francisco. The panel was titled “Tapping Millennial Passions,” and the panelists were noted Millennial researchers: Barbara Bylenga, CEO, Outlaw Consulting, Alex Smith of Mintel, and Tracy Panko, CEO, Spiral16.
The session focused on how Millennial passions are expressed and how they differ from those other generations. The panelists also discussed the potentially disruptive implications of these differences for marketing products and services across a number of categories.
Alex Smith began by noting that while Millennials’ passions may be similar in some ways to those of older cohorts – the environment, causes, music – the way they express and pursue those passions is very different. They have more tools to express their passions, which are used to curate their personal identities and gain attention. Their overall goal is to express themselves in a way that is true to who they really are.
Barbara Bylenga added that Millennials are especially passionate about things that impact others: the planet, the environment, social justice, poverty. They see their passions as a way to define themselves as ‘changemakers’. What other generations might consider an ‘interest’, Millennials see as central to who they are. They define success in terms of their ability to turn these interests into accomplishments or even a career. Hence their passions are especially motivating.
Use a lifestage lense to predict and plan for Millennial impact
Bylenga says lifestage is a good lense for thinking about how Millennials will change categories. The latest Census data confirms Millennials are putting off childrearing, staying single longer. Currently they are in the ‘explorer’ lifestage, but as they mature, many are entering the ‘spinner’ stage, forming households and settling down, and in some cases readjusting but not necessarily abandoning their passions. They still want to make a difference, but will realize (rationalize?) that making a differences lies in the cumulative effect of small decisions, little actions, not necessarily a big career accomplishment. Every little decision is going to take on added significance. Marketers can leverage this insight by helping them feel like their consumer choices are helping make a difference.
Bylenga went on to say Millennials will increasingly see it as a stepping stone to independence, with many aspiring to be entrepreneurs rather than bind themselves to a sure paycheck. (In fact, this prediction may be already coming true. There was a 250% increase in the past two years in the number of Millennials who choose freelance work over a job.)
Characteristics of brands that generate passion among Millennials
When asked the characteristics of brands that generate the greatest amount of passion among Millennials, panelists repeated mentioned the importance of authenticity. According to Barkely’s research, Livestrong is the number four most recognized charity among this age group, a position it achieved by being authentic according to research by Spiral16, said CEO, Tracy Panko.
Despite dramatic and controversial events surrounding Livestrong founder Lance Armstrong, the Spiral16 data shows that Livestrong has continued to successfully engage their community and turn them into passionate evangelists. Besides amassing a huge following on Twitter, Livestrong has also spread its influence and message across other social media platforms with a clear and concise message. Eight out of the Top 10 most influential web pages in the study are components of the Livestrong organization, while the remaining two pages were created by passionate Livestrong fans. (The RSS feed for the Livestrong blog ranked even higher — number two — than blog URL itself.)
Panko points out that this kind of community and presence is impressive. As much as brands would like to, they cannot just control online attitudes at will. A digital presence this dominating, nonprofit or not, can only be built up from years of consistent hard work and clear strategizing. She also cited Patagonia as another brand with a strong authentic brand with special appeal to Millennials. Patagonia’s willingness to willingness to show the less desirable parts of their brand suggests an honesty that allows them to win with consumers. Other brands cited for their authenticity were Trader Joe’s and In ‘N Out Burger.
By Guest Blogger, Judy Hopelain
Recently, I was in a conversation about student activism. Participants were mostly folks who remembered the ’60s fondly. The majority view seemed to be that student activism is dead…that most of today’s students don’t want to make waves, and are more concerned about paying off loans and getting a job than about the quality of life in the world around them.
I think they have it completely wrong.
As a lecturer at the Haas School of Business at UC Berkeley, I have the opportunity to get to know 40-50 juniors and seniors fairly well over the course of a semester. Students in my class come from a variety of majors including business, communications, engineering, design, and American studies. They do care about paying off loans and getting jobs. And their class participation and projects show clearly that they are also concerned about more than themselves.
Today’s college students are fluent in the language of social responsibility – not just the CSR type initiatives that are just a thin veneer.
They have little use for those, and can smell a “green washing” from a mile away. No, their passion is for brands that have built doing good into their business models. And they choose class projects that allow them to figure out ways for other brands to do good, too.
TOMs Shoes success on campuses across the country is a case in point. Students love this brand for its integrity and honesty, and they want to help it succeed in its mission to give away a pair of shoes to a shoeless Third World child for every pair sold. As part of a class assignment, my students came up with a number of ways to extend the brand’s meaning, broaden its reach and increase its impact like creating more of a connection between the giver and the recipient community – allowing givers to go work on community development projects in those communities, creating an app that would allow givers to ‘track’ the gifted shoes from factory to recipient like Domino’s allows customers to track their pizza from store to door.
American Apparel is better known for its provocative imagery and sexual harassment lawsuit-laden founder than for its idealism. Nonetheless, my students recommended ways to refocus the brand on worker rights and its made-in-America heritage to reengage consumers in American Apparel’s historical activism. Inspired by Chrysler’s highly successful Eminem commercials, they recommend that American Apparel, which has its only factory in LA, open a second factory in Detroit (as soon as it addresses its cash flow issues).
True, students are not protesting wars or throwing rocks at the police or other forms of the establishment. But this form of activism is no less heart-felt or legitimate, and it’s also likely to be more enduring.
Isn’t it about time boomers got over themselves? As Steven Colbert’s segment on Ted Nugent on June 27 illustrates, the ‘60s were a VERY long time ago.
Two new research reports came out this week that offer more than the usual superficial ‘survey findings’ about Millennials.
These deeper looks at Millennials may reflect the increasing understanding that this cohort matters. Both studies provide a treasure house of new insights and an appreciation of the complexity of describing a whole generation without resorting to platitudes like “They’re connected!”
Here’s a sample to help you understand why you might want to read the full reports:
1. “The Truth About Youth” by McCann WorldGroup
This engaging report (worth reading for the graphic presentation as well as the content) is based on qualitative and quantitative research among 7000 young people around the world. Sixteen motivations provide an organizing framework (i.e., JUSTICE, COCOONING, JOURNEYING, MUSCLE, SURGE, etc.)
Here are some highlights from the report:
“If we want to truly grasp the power of connection for this generation, we can look at how they want to be remembered. It is not for their beauty, their power, or their influence, but simply for the quality of their human relationships and their ability to look after those around them.”
“Once upon a time, teenagers had a small group of friends (typically 4-7 people), and these were often people met through school. Within this group young people could express their individuality, but it was vital that they belonged to the group. However, nowadays things are more complex. Using social media, a typical teenager is likely to manage and maintain multiple, intersecting groups of friends. In this sense, ‘connecting’ to a broader network of friends has replaced the singular need to ‘belong’ to a tight-knit group of friends.”
“In the Social Economy it’s not good enough to simply do something…you have to tell people about it before it becomes real. In other words…”pics or it didn’t happen!””
“The best possible result in social media for young people is when someone else uploads a photograph of you looking cool and then tags you. In this scenario you get all the credit without looking overly vain or full of yourself.”
“The flipside to mass self-expression and connectivity is the ability to continuously measure your own life achievements against those within your network. Never before have young people found it easier to benchmark their successes (or lack of…). As the Social Economy increases its reach, could we find an entire generation impacted by social status anxiety?”
2. “Millennials, Abortion & Religion Survey” by Public Religion Research Institute
Few topics are more sensitive than abortion and gay marriage, but this report manages to handle both with sensitivity and nuance. A broad national sample of 3,000 allows for comparison of Millennial opinions to those of other age groups. The report offers insights as to why they are different, and why they are sometimes, surprisingly, similar to other generations.
Here are some highlights:
“One of the most politically important ways Millennials differ from other cohorts is their attitudes toward gender roles and sexual morality. Millennials strongly support gender equality and rights for gay and lesbian people and generally have more permissive attitudes toward sexuality issues. However, by traditional measure, younger Americans are no more supportive of abortion rights than the general population, despite having demographic characteristics (e.g., less religious) and attitudes on related issues (e.g., gender equality) that are positively correlated with support for legal abortion.”
“Nearly equal numbers of Millennials (60%), Americans age 30-49 (58%), and Americans age 50-64 (59%) say abortion should be legal in all or most cases…The generational divide on the issue of same sex marriage, in contrast, is nearly linear and dramatic.”
“Approximately 7 in 10 Millennials (71%) support this requirement [parental consent for women under the age of 18 for an abortion].” (Note this is higher than the public at large which is 68%)
While Americans [including Millennials] are nearly divided in identifying with the pro-life and pro-choice labels they have a clear opinion of which label is more socially acceptable. A majority (53%) say it is more acceptable to be pro-choice in America today.. this holds true across most demographic groups including Millennials.”
Encouraging Signs
These two studies give me hope that we are finally getting beyond the negative stereotypes of entitlement, job dissatisfaction, technology addiction and other unproductive avenues of discussion and starting to get to a deeper understanding of this complex generation. I see a lot of research, and much of it looks the same, in the questions asked and the routine conclusions. I applaud these groups for digging deeper.
Links to full reports:
Millennials, Abortion and Religion (pdf)
Companies who hope to win and sustain Millennial customers know the importance of product and marketing innovation. Millennials love shiny things, especially when those things contribute to their personal efficiency, help to protect the environment or contribute to the greater good.
Pepsi’s announcement this week of innovative new plastic packaging sourced 100% from plant-based materials, may be a game changer in the cola wars in its ability to appeal to Millennials.
Why Package Innovation Matters
One of the most difficult aspects of managing an iconic mega-food brand is that it nearly impossible to offer meaningful product innovation. Think about it, do you really want to be the brand manager that messes with the recipe for Heinz Ketchup or (gasp) Coca-Cola? The most you can hope for is an innovative new marketing approach like Pepsi Refresh or Coca-Cola’s ‘Open Happiness Machine’ viral video. Once in a great while, you may strike gold with a package innovation, as Heinz with its plastic squeeze bottle.
Believe it or not, ketchup only came in glass bottles until the mid-eighties, due to the considerable technology required to make a clear bottle that would resist the acidic nature of ketchup. The bottle was an immediate hit and consolidated Heinz already sizeable share lead. A few years later, the upside down squeeze bottle completed the evolution, until recently.
Last year, I toured Heinz Innovation Center outside Pittsburgh. Much of the R&D activity there still revolves around packaging, such as its Dip & Squeeze package. Heinz web site says the dipping package is its first significant food service side innovation in 42 years.
Introducing Plant Based Packaging Material
In November, Heinz announced its latest package innovation, tapping Coca-Cola’s technology to put ketchup in bottles made of 30% recycled plant material starting next summer. Heinz seemed to get the jump even on Coke as it isn’t clear when they plan to roll the technology out for their own products.
Perhaps in response to the Coca-Cola package move, Pepsi made a packaging move of its own earlier this week when it announced that beginning in 2012, it would incorporate 100% recycled plant materials in its beverage packaging. As Coca-Cola say “it could take a few more years to develop the technology” to replace the other 70% of its packaging with plant-based material, this could provide Pepsi with an important short-term edge. While it still needs to be recycled, the fact that it is made with recycled plant material puts it ahead on the ecological impact scale. Significantly, Pepsi says the change will be imperceptible to consumers in appearance, functionality and cost. What’s not to like?
Pepsi Packaging: Will It Be The Choice of a New Generation?
In the cola wars where every little bit counts, this packaging offers serious bragging rights. While it may be subtle, in the cola and wider beverage wars, every little bit counts. This new package (and I hope they give it a proprietary name!), may give Pepsi an important edge. All things being equal, most Millennials would opt for the environmentally sound option. Here’s what I said when asked for my opinion by Chicago Tribune writer, Greg Karp:
“It could be a game changer for them,” said Carol Phillips, a University of Notre Dame marketing professor and president of market research firm Brand Amplitude. “In the cola wars, every little bit means something. It’s a game of perception. It can tip the balance, at least for a while.” The environmentally friendly bottle can be a marketing edge, depending on how Pepsi exploits it, Phillips said. That’s especially true among so-called millennials or Generation Y, a primary target for soft-drink companies. “I think it’s big for the millennials,” she said. “Everybody would love a way to be green, especially if it doesn’t cost them any more.”
This innovation, combined with its ground-breaking Pepsi Refresh marketing effort, may indeed make Pepsi the choice of this next generation — at least for a while.
Note: For great insights into the Millennial marketing behind the Pepsi Refresh effort I highly recommend this YPulse interview with Pepsi exec, Maria Irazabel.
When it comes to defining personal identity, few brand choices matter more than what you choose to wear. When students tell me they aren’t into brands, I merely smile and point to the Notre Dame, Nike, and Adidas logos on their hats, shirts and shoes. For Millennials, apparel brands are an important means of curating identity.
For marketers, the challenge is to understand what makes a brand cool enough to wear?
The Coolest Brands
There are many systems designed to tell us which brands have the most equity, are the most valuable or represent the greatest value to consumers. But until today I was unaware of a serious study of which brands are the most cool. Spanish branding agency, Allegro234, recently released results of its 2010 Coolest & Gaps Branding Survey. The study, now in its third consecutive year surveyed 4,200 people in 28 countries.
One of the things that makes it so original is its emphasis on write-in responses. Rather than pre-ordain the coolest brands, they rely on nominations. Each respondent proposes one brand that represents ‘the coolest experience’. Remarkably, of the 114 global brands nominated, 20 represent 60% of the responses. The top 40 proposed brands are 75%. This high degree of consensus suggests we know all cool when we see it.
The study went beyond proposing cool brands and also asked participants to rate their nominated brands on ten dimensions of the brand experience. These dimensions included ‘Brand’, ‘Communication’, ‘Place’, ‘Availability’, ‘Related Services’, ‘Tailormade’, ‘Interactivity’, ‘Respect for the Environment’, and ‘Social Responsiblity’.
Of these ten factors, by far the most important was ‘Brand’ – the vision that the brand promises.
The Coolest Apparel Brands
The entire report is well-worth reading, but for this blog I will focus just on the apparel brands. Not surprisingly, apparel brands represent a large proportion of the top 60 coolest brands. They include:
Diesel (6), H&M (9), Gap (12), Nike (14), Levi’s (17), Adidas (19), Swatch (22), North Face (23), Hugo Boss (26), Stella McCarthy (31), D&G (32), Patagonia (40), Top Shop (42), Pony (45), Zara (49), and Burberry (51).
Allegro234 observes that cool apparel brands fall into four broad categories. Tellingly, none of these categories has much to do with ‘luxury’:
Masstige: Ex: Stella McCartney, Hugo Boss, D&G, LaMartina, Disiguel
Mass: Ex: Target, Gap, H&M, Top Shop, Zara
Performance Sports: Ex: Nike, Patagonia, North Face
Urban Sports: Ex: Adidas, Pony
One of the most fascinating lessons here is that ‘luxury is no longer a guarantee of coolness’. The report goes as far as to conclude that ‘luxury brands with some exceptions, are no longer considered cool’ and that a cool experience is now what matters most in the definition of cool’.
“A cool experience helps peoples’ referential status and moves away from the traditional idea of luxury. Something luxurious is not necessarily cool. This gives greater weight to trends over more rational shopping processes and the flow of the experience is more important than possessing he product in order to live it.” 2010 Coolest Brands Survey, p 13.
I have long said that luxury is not relevant to Millennials. In my experience, young adults have a different metric for determining value, and that metric rarely involves status or prestige. While it’s true that Millennials enjoy premium brands, their affinity has more to do with the experience of ownership than the fact of ownership. A Coach or LV bag for a young professional woman, represents the first step on the path to a professional image or career. It has practical connotations, an accessory that aids confidence in an interview and suggests you are discerning and willing to ‘invest’ in something of value.
Other related lessons: Mass brands can be just as cool as exclusive brands. Performance brands can be just as cool as fashion brands. In other words, it’s no longer essential to be ‘hip’ to be ‘cool’.
Do Millennials Relate Differently to Brands?
The research on cool brands was not limited to Millennials, but coolness represent a more modern view of brand value than more traditional markers. In particular, by underscoring the importance of ‘brand’ in the sense of ‘credible promise or vision’, the Allegro study is better aligned with how Millennials choose brands.
New frameworks are needed and have started to appear, that emphasize attributes such as Identity, Performance and Social Responsibility (Future Brands). I like to think of these as Competence, Caring and Belief. More research is needed before we can conclude that Millennials relate differently to brands, but I am convinced they do.
Cee-Lo's Grammy Performance
Millennials are influencing our tastes in many subtle and not so subtle ways. I am keenly aware of the influence my Millennial age kids and students have on my tastes and purchases, in everything from cars, to clothes, to foods and entertainment.
Grammy Obsessed
To illustrate just how far I’ve come, Sunday night I was riveted by the Grammy Awards. I have never watched it before, and I actually watched it alone as everyone else in my family seemed to have more important things to do.
How could I miss Cee-Lo, Rhianna, Drake, Eminem, Gaga, Bruno and Katy do amazing performances of songs I that have become stuck in my head day in and day out? (Katy Perry’s “Teenage Dream” seems to be remarkably sticky.) I loved seeing Glee’s Lea Michele and Matt Morrisey in the limelight. In contrast to all that energy, Barbra and Kris seemed boring, though Mick Jagger still has the ability to energize a room the size of the Staples Center.
I truly cared whether the rap and dance artists would come out on top for Record and Album of the Year. They didn’t, and I went on line to share my woes and see if anyone else was as disappointed (here’s a great recap from a Millennial). My point? If someone had told me a few years ago that I would like rap, dance and pop music, much less care about these stars I would have sniffed and said I only listen to NPR.
Is Your Brand Culturally Aware?
Culture has always been a big part of youth marketing, and now it seems to be increasingly important to all marketing, thanks to Millennials. It wasn’t just his connections to Detroit that made Eminem a brilliant choice for Chrysler’s two minute SuperBowl spot. After all, they could have opted for Kid Rock.
A recent article by the PR firm, Edelman, titled “Why Millennials Matter to Every Brand” argues that Millennial’s influence is a strong argument for making them a key target now, even if your stated target is 25-54 or even 35-54. Edelman puts it this way:
“All of the chatter from Millennials, all of the sharing and noise, it makes an impact on the generations before them. They are listening. They are influenced by what their children and grandchildren are saying because they can say it loudly, with confidence and knowledge that only their Smartphones could give them. Millennials will continue to dominate influence and pop culture. That is, until the next generation, Generation Z, quickly changes the world once again.”
Edelman offers these reasons for even brands like diapers and home alerts to consider Millennials a key target, now:
1. Size: “By 2015, almost half (47%) of the world population will be under the age of 25.”
2. Influence: “Two-thirds of Millennials are now over the age of 21, and many have established careers, families and an incredible amount of influence.”
3. Digital Prowess: “They were raised digital. This fact alone makes Millennials unlike anything the world has seen.”
4. Global Reach: “Technology knocks down borders. Multiculturalism is the norm and new trends and opinions spread quickly.”
5. Brand-Happy: “Brand preference was the #1 personal identifier that Millennials were willing to share about themselves online.”
6. See Themselves as Influencers: “76 percent of Millennials think they are highly depended on for their opinions.
7. Active Advocates (and Detractors): ”Millennials are taking action on behalf of brands, both online and offline, every week. And, those actions aren’t just for high profile lifestyle brands.”
These arguments will be familiar to reader of this blog. But they serve as a great reminder that if Millennials are not part of your target now, you may wake up and find you are still listening to NPR – and your competition is listening to B96.
This week, the events in Egypt and “Blizzard 2011″ have dominated the news. For most of us, the ‘snow day’ has been a nuisance. But for unemployed Millennials, everyday is a snow day.
What’s more, the events in Egypt and Tunisia are making it clear young adult unemployment can have major consequences for society.
A Generation is a Terrible Thing to Waste
I highly recommend checking out Business Week’s cover story, “The Youth Unemployment Bomb” (2.2.11). The article points out that what we call ‘boomerang kids’ are not just a U.S. concern, but a worldwide problem that could have long-term implications if not addressed:
“In Tunisia, the young people who helped bring down a dictator are called hittistes—French-Arabic slang for those who lean against the wall. Their counterparts in Egypt, who on Feb. 1 forced President Hosni Mubarak to say he won’t seek reelection, are the shabab atileen, unemployed youths. The hittistes and shabab have brothers and sisters across the globe. In Britain, they are NEETs—”not in education, employment, or training.” In Japan, they are freeters: an amalgam of the English word freelance and the German word Arbeiter, or worker. Spaniards call them mileuristas, meaning they earn no more than 1,000 euros a month. In the U.S., they’re “boomerang” kids who move back home after college because they can’t find work. Even fast-growing China, where labor shortages are more common than surpluses, has its “ant tribe“—recent college graduates who crowd together in cheap flats on the fringes of big cities because they can’t find well-paying work.
In each of these nations, an economy that can’t generate enough jobs to absorb its young people has created a lost generation of the disaffected, unemployed, or underemployed—including growing numbers of recent college graduates for whom the post-crash economy has little to offer.
The article goes on to describe the “quiet desperation of a generation in “waithood,” suspended short of fully employed adulthood“. It challenges us to consider the consequences of failing to help young people find a place in society. Can we afford NOT to “harness the energy, intelligence, and enthusiasm of the next generation?”
Adulthood Delayed
Two recent books have both explored the difficulties of ‘emerging adults’ in the U.S. Both are based on extensive academic longitudinal research among what are now called Millennials. And both reach the same conclusion: Making the transition to adulthood has never been so challenging. What’s more, young adults who lack adequate guidance and support are increasingly losing their way along the path. Contributing factors include high job expectations, the high price of education, the Recession and a slowly dawning realization that the traditional ‘college prep’ approach is no longer a sure ticket to middle class prosperity.
“Not Quite Adults: Why 20-Something Are Choosing a Slower path to Adulthood, and Why It’s good for Everyone” by Richard Setterson and Barbara E. Ray
The authors draw on a variety of sources (many of the same ones I draw on for this blog) to describe a generation that is ‘lost without a compass’. “Given the importance of higher education tody to earning a living wage with benefits, it is surpresing how unprepared many young people are for college and how unformed their plans really are.” The authorsclaim many enroll because they don’t know what else to do. Others who should enroll don’t because they fear debt. The authors are especially concerned for what they dub ‘the treaders’ (as opposed to the ‘swimmers’). The final chapter urges the realization that we are all ‘responsible for the welfare of young people’, but there is a special burden on parents. While the dangers of hyper parenting are real, the dangers of leaving young adults on their own too soon is greater.
“Souls in Transition: The Religious & Spiritual Lies of Emerging Adults” by Christian Smith & Patricia Snell
This book is about much more than religion and spirituality, it encompasses the entire scope and culture of young adulthood. The book is based on research on the same set of young adults that began when they were 13-17 years old nearly 10 years ago. The authors conclude that the experience of young adulthood is changing rapidly. The fundamental driving goal is getting to the point where they can ‘stand on their own two feet’, but many are learning it is even harder than they expected. Many are overwhelmed with all of the skills, tasks, responsibilties, systems and procedures they must learn. Most feel ‘broke’, and live paycheck to paycheck whether they ‘objectively actually are out of money or not’. Money is a constant source of anxiety.
Getting on With It
As these books illustrate, we know what the problem is, but what are the solutions? A few prescriptions seem to be emerging:
1. Greater emphasis on career training, mentoring and vocational ed.
2. Incentives for older adults to retire or step back to create opportunities for young adults.
3. Greater understanding that a slow start is not ‘failure to launch’.
4. Greater voice for young adults in the civic process.
5. More alternatives like gap years, stipends for public service and other ways to put non-productive time to good use (without going into deeper debt).
Yet more seems to be called for. As the Business Week article suggests, youth unemployment, leading to estrangement between generations, may be the ‘epidemic’ of our age.
“In short, the fissure between young and old is deepening. “The older generations have eaten the future of the younger ones,” former Italian Prime Minister Giuliano Amato told Corriere della Sera. In Britain, Employment Minister Chris Grayling has called chronic unemployment a “ticking time bomb.” Jeffrey A. Joerres, chief executive officer of Manpower (MAN), a temporary-services firm with offices in 82 countries and territories, adds, “Youth unemployment will clearly be the epidemic of this next decade unless we get on it right away. You can’t throw in the towel on this.”
I came to dance, dance, dance, dance
I hit the floor
‘Cause that’s my, plans, plans, plans, plans
I’m wearing all my favorite
Brands, brands, brands, brands
Give me space for both my hands, hands, hands, hands
You, you
Cause it goes on and on and on
And it goes on and on and on
Millennials are suspicious of marketers, skeptical of claims and ignoring ads, but their affinity for brands is undiminished. Gen Y understands that brands are cultural symbols that convey meaning. Brand choice, especially in image driven categories like mobile phones, shoes, entertainment, and clothing brands matters even more to teens and young adults, than to older consumers.
Brand Talk
Keller Fay’s 2010 Talk Track study asked participants use a diary to keep track of their brand conversations between July 2009 and June 2010. The study sample ranged from ages 13 to 69, and included a break out sample of 4,900 teens (ages 13 to 17).
They found that, overall, teens engage in a significantly higher level of word of mouth about all brand categories than the public as a whole. Furthermore, teens are twice as likely as everyone else to hold brand conversations online, although online still accounts for a minority of brand conversations even among teens (13% for teens vs. 7% for general public). (‘ Online’ included email, texting/IM and social networking).
The sheer volume of DAILY conversations about brands is impressive.
- 69% of teens have one or more conversations per day that include food/dining brands, versus 54% of the total public.
- 67%/39% about technology;
- 63%/42% about sports/recreation/hobbies;
- 63%/39% about telecommunications;
- 59%/38% about retail/apparel
- 58%/46% about beverages
- 45%/35% about automotive
- 45%/26% about personal care/beauty
Marketers, Brand Stories and Facebook
This week, Facebook announced a new program called ‘Sponsored Stories‘ designed to generate revenue from these conversations.
When a friend mentions a brand or has any brand interaction such as “Page Likes, App interactions, Place check-ins and Page posts”, that mention will now show up in a separate ‘sponsored stories’ area to the right of the feed. This is to make sure that mention isn’t missed. Here’s a short two-minute video from Facebook explaining how it works.
Make no mistake, Brand Stories are ’advertisements’, but they are likely to receive little or no pushback from Millennials, for they don’t seem like ads. Millennials want to know what brands their friends ‘like’. As the video points out, “anything they would have seen as a sponsored story is something they would already have seen in their newsfeed.” Now, it’s just more likely those interactions will be noticed.
Brandification?
As Millennial Josip Petrusa points out in his blog this week, Sponsored Stories is just a continuation of the ‘Brandification of Your Social Presence”.
“Both Edelman’s “8095” and L2’s “Gen-Y Affluents” reports have verified that Millennials are considerably brand-centric. They love the brand. They love brands. They share brands. They talk brands. They live brands. They speak brands. And they have invested considerable ideological value into them. They have come to represent who they are. When you make this correlation you begin to see the very beginnings of branded social profiles. Brands will no longer come to represent the products that encompass them but the user who empowers them. The user who humanizes them.”
The stories go on and on and on
From my perspective, what Petrusa calls ‘branded social profiles” is the continuation of a trend toward the humanization of brands and the branding of people, places and institutions that has been developing for years. The trend has simply accelerated with the advent of social media.
James Twitchell wrote a provocative book as early 2004, titled “Branded Nation: The Marketing of Megachurch, College, Inc., and Museumworld“ . Twitchell points out the importance of stories to branding in clear terms: ’Often the only thing that separates this ratty rug from that priceless tapestry is a story’.
In the age of social media, ’brand’ stories are no longer confined to the ‘marketplace’ but are now part of culture, both high and low. The difference is that now we are more self-conscious about creating those stories. Here’s Twitchell again:
“And really, isn’t all life about marketing, in a sense? You market yourself to your friends, to your employer, your constituents, and they to you. Your children market themselves to their sport team (pick me! pickme!), schools market themselves (a degree from us is a ticket to success), and even churches market themselves (services at 9 and 11) and their products (forgiveness now, salvation later). Maybe it’s just the illusion of not marketing that we need to dispense with.” (p. 3)
Millennials are the first generation to be educated at a time when knowledge is both plentiful and accessible.
Educators are struggling to make the shift from a model that was intent on helping students acquire knowledge through a prescribed path (a path that had been tried and tested over centuries), to one where it’s not necessary to know the answers, only how to find them. Indeed, the key skills today are knowing how to discern credible sources from those that are less trustworthy.
The benefits of information democratization are undeniable. One only has to look at the DIY’ing of “elite” professional services (legal, health care, finance, academic etc.), to understand that free flowing information is a terrific thing.
At The London School of Business Finance, you can now get an MBA via Facebook. Over 30,000 students have already registered and 500,000 are expected to. Courses in accounting, corporate finance, ethics, marketing, and strategic planning are free, students only pay when they take a test. The total cost of the online MBA degree? About $23,000, an incredible value when measured against $80,000 or more for a traditional MBA degree.
In looking at the world in terms of knowing what one doesn’t have to know, something is also lost. We seem to be losing an appreciation for complexity and nuance.
Everything is Not a Data Point
Douglas Rushkoff observes in his book Program or Be Programmed, that “not everything is a data point.“ Rushkoff warns that “net research is more about engaging with data in order to dismiss it and move on – like a magazine one flips through not to read but to make sure there’s nothing has has to be read. Reading becomes a process of elimination rather than deep engagement. Life becomes about knowing how not to know what one doesn’t have to know.”
A Generation of Information Hunter Gatherers
We are becoming adept at scanning, looking for the nugget rather than context. But are we losing an appreciation for the deep understanding that comes from immersion in one discipline? Rushkoff believes this ‘surfer’ experience that substitutes impressions with real knowledge is especially true of Millennials:
“Young people, in particular, are developing the ability to get the gist of an entire area of study with just a moment of interaction with it. With a channel surfer’s skill, they are able to experience a book, movie, or even a scientific process almost intuitively. For them, hearing a few lines of T.S. Eliot, seeing one geometric proof, or looking at a picture of an African mask leave them with a real, albeit oversimplified, impression of the world from which it comes. This works especially well for areas of art and study that are ‘fractal’ or holographic in nature, where one tiny piece reflects the essence of the whole.”
As a professor, I have experienced this subtle shift over the past five years in the form of pressure to distill my classes to the essence of what is important. The photo above is of my brand building library. As I sit down to plan a syllabus or class, I look at this bookshelf and despair – how can I possibly encapsulate this body of knowledge into finite, digestible, byte-sized pieces? It’s overwhelming. Somehow I doubt the professors of 50 years ago felt the same way. But then they didn’t have competition from a Facebook app.
Textbooks are becoming shorter and more condensed, in response to students’ impatience with long pages of text. Irrationally, I have come to judge my own competency as a teacher by how efficiently I can convey the concepts and complexity of the marketing and brand strategy without making unreasonable demands upon students. Increasingly, I see my job as the explorer coming back from a distant land to convey as much of what I know as is humanly possible to the untravelled audience in just 28 sessions.
Critical Thinking at Risk
A new book, Academically Adrift, is about to be released that reports the results of a study of 2,322 college students at a range of institutions from 2005-2009. Researchers discovered nearly half of the students didn’t learn “the critical thinking, complex reasoning and written communication skills that are widely assumed to be at the core of a college education” during their first two years of college.
“Many of the students graduated without knowing how to sift fact from opinion, make a clear written argument or objectively review conflicting reports of a situation or event, according to New York University sociologist Richard Arum, lead author of the study. The students, for example, couldn’t determine the cause of an increase in neighborhood crime or how best to respond without being swayed by emotional testimony and political spin.”
Aside from the dismal overall finding, the specific findings of who did and didn’t learn are also telling:
“…The study also showed that students who studied alone made more significant gains in learning than those who studied in groups.”
“Students who majored in the traditional liberal arts — including the social sciences, humanities, natural sciences and mathematics — showed significantly greater gains over time than other students in critical thinking, complex reasoning and writing skills.
“Students majoring in business, education, social work and communications showed the least gains in learning.”
“Greater gains in liberal arts subjects are at least partly the result of faculty requiring higher levels of reading and writing, as well as students spending more time studying, the study’s authors found. Students who took courses heavy on both reading (more than 40 pages a week) and writing (more than 20 pages in a semester) showed higher rates of learning.”
These results should be a wake up call to those of us in higher ed. College is not about byte-sized learning, it is about mastery and mastery requires more attention than what is required by hunting and gathering facts, or even learning how to hunt and gather facts.
The world is complex and getting more so. We can’t settle for simplicity.
