10

The As-Yet-to-Be-Defined Generation Z

WITH MY DELINEATION marking them as being born between 2005 and 2024, and as of 2015 ages zero to 11, Generation Z remains undefined. As of 2015, about 43 million had been born, perhaps somewhere in the neighborhood of half the birth numbers that we can expect from this still-forming generation. While the generation is still too young and small to assert itself—or for that matter, make a name for itself—I believe that this generation will emerge as the most ethnically and culturally diverse ever in the United States. I also would expect that this generation will become more technically savvy than their predecessors, Gen Y. But this stands to reason, because as the technology evolves we have to evolve with it.

While I refuse to define this generation beyond its expected diversity and technological ability because it has yet to “come of age,” there is no lack of pundits and generational “experts” out there willing to wax poetic about the characteristics of this still-to-emerge generation. And these characteristics are all over the map. “Least likely to believe that there is such a thing as the American Dream.” “More risk adverse than the Millennials.” “Have a digital bond to the Internet.” “Tend to be independent.” “Expect to find a job that will be an expression of their identity.”

A job! Really . . . ?

The oldest are only 11 years old, and I seriously doubt that these 11-year-olds are already pondering their future employment.

Oh, and many of these pundits are also asserting that it is the largest generation currently alive in America, but I would surmise that these generational geniuses are either using an especially broad birth range, or just haven’t bothered to actually count their numbers according to the delineation being used.

From what I can tell, the wide variety in opinions about characteristics and size of Gen Z is due primarily to the broad disparity in delineations given for Gen Y, which was caused in large part to the widespread mis-delineation of Generation X. In fact, I believe that this wide variation in delineations is going to make it about the most screwed-up generation with regard to perceptions about exactly how many they are, how old, and what range of ages.

You have heard me rail in previous chapters about the problems caused by the wonky delineations of Gen X and Y, and those problems are really coming home to roost with Gen Z. I have seen Gen Z’s first birth year called as early as 1990 and as late as 2010, and seen the generational timeline described as as short as seven years to as many as twenty-five.

Seven years? Yeah, born between 1996 and 2003. Oh, and this narrowly defined Gen Z is “independent, stubborn, pragmatic, and always in a rush,” and they also “live a life that seems a million miles removed from the hopes, dreams, and morals of previous generations.”

Ludicrous, I say, about both this pundit’s delineation and his description of this age group.

The nine-year Gen Z delineation I saw used the birth years 1990 and 1999, and made me wonder what happened to the Millennials.

In so many of the descriptions and delineations I’ve seen, the lines between Gens Y and Z seem so blurred, and yet the pundits profess to have a clear understanding about what distinguishes them from each other. And yet these experts cannot even agree on a moniker for Gen Z. Take your pick: “Post Millennials,” “Net Gen,” “Gen Wii,” “iGeneration,” “Homeland Generation,” “Digitarians,” “Internet Generation,” “Digital Natives,” and “Plurals.”

Plurals? I know, say what?

Oh, and some pundits have tried to refer to Gen Z as Generation Me, calling them “narcissistic,” self-absorbed, etc. And yes, that same name and vapid descriptions were also applied by some to Gen X and, to a greater degree, Gen Y. I would have to say that these pundits are all mixed up because of their wonky delineations.

The Baby Boomers were cut-and-dried, with just about everyone agreeing that the Boomer birth years pretty much ranged between 1945 and 1964 and consisted of the long-accepted twenty-year generational span. Because so-called experts played around with and/or short-changed the age range of Gen X so much, it naturally affected the subsequent delineations of Gens Y and Z. So much so that most people don’t really know where Gen X ends and Gen Y begins, and that one person’s definition of Gen Z might be another person’s definition of late-year Gen Y.

This lack of consistent delineation has gotten so bad that pundits are already starting to spout off about the next generation, which is thus far being referred to as “Generation Alpha,” with a few of these pundits claiming that this generation began in 2010.

Bottom line is that if you’re going to pay attention to any so-called generational or demographic “expert,” make sure that he or she has clearly delineated the generation in question, and that the delineation makes sense.

But I digress . . . back to Gen Z, or, more specifically, back to my delineation and understanding of this still-emerging generation.

Generation Z births began in 2005 at the tail end of a Generation Y slow rise in birth numbers that started in 1997, which represented Gen Y’s second-lowest birth year, with about 3.8 million registered births. By 2004 the annual number had risen to just over 4.1 million, and was followed by an increase of roughly 26,000 births in Gen Z’s first year. Birth numbers continued a slow increase for the next couple of years, hitting over 4.3 million in 2007, but then, in what is largely believed to be a response to the financial crisis of 2008 and subsequent Great Recession, birth numbers dropped by about 70,000 in 2008 and then dropped down just below 4 million in 2009, where they remained through 2014.¹

My belief that this generation will be the most ethnically and racially diverse to date in the United States is being borne out by the official annual birth data. While Hispanic births represented about 12.5 percent of annual births during the first year of Generation Y, as defined in this book, was actually 1985 . . . by the first year of Gen Z in 2005, Hispanics represented about 25 percent of annual births, a figure that has held up until 2014. Asian births, meanwhile, climbed from about 3 percent of annual births in 1985 to about 7 percent as of 2014. Consider also that prior to 1980 Asian birth data wasn’t even recorded as a separate entity by the nation’s vital statistics system.

On a numeric basis, the number of White births and Black births has been holding consistent since the start of Gen Y, with a respective rough annual average of 3.1 million White births and 625,000 Black births. As most Hispanics tend to identify as White, this has not significantly altered the racial birth proportions; however, the ethnically based proportions have definitely shifted with the rise of Hispanic births. While Asian birth numbers reached an all-time high of more than 280,000 in 2014, the proportional increase is relatively small.

What does this portend? I believe that this will serve to continue the “colorblinding” of America that is so evident with Generation Y, which appears to be the least bigoted and racially prejudiced of any American generation in history.

Given birth numbers to date, it would appear that Gen Z could end up as large as its preceding generation, Y, and thus, will not likely cause any massive sales declines as was the case with the diminutive-by-birth Gen X. On a strictly numeric basis, Gen Z appears to be a continuation of Gen Y. Unlike the four previous generations—Silents, Boomers, X, and Y—which arrived with noticeable shifts in numbers, there is nothing numerical yet to really distinguish Z from Y. Perhaps another reason pundits are having such a hard time differentiating between the two.