Archive for the ‘Consumer’ Category
Wednesday, August 25th, 2010
A recent article in the New York Times by Robin Marantz Hening explores the evolution of adolescence and how psychologists are struggling to describe the “unfinished” nature of twentysomething adults. According to some, like “Emerging Adulthood” author, Jeffrey Arnett, the twenties are an under-recognized stage in adult development, created by a rapid change in our economic and cultural space. In an information-based economy, Arnett sees“…the need for more education to survive in an information-based economy; fewer entry-level jobs even after all that schooling; young people feeling less rush to marry because of the general acceptance of premarital sex, cohabitation and birth control; and young women feeling less rush to have babies given their wide range of career options and their access to assisted reproductive technology if they delay pregnancy beyond their most fertile years.”
These realizations have lead to the creation of the Society for the Study of Emerging Adulthood. Others aren’t quite so sure, nothing that the period of adult rootlessness that this life-stage is not universal – many, in fact, skip it, and progress towards marriage and child-rearing right after adolescence. Development scientist Richard Lerner believes that to be a “real” life-stage (in clinical terms), it has to be universal, meaning that there need to be real measureable consequences for those who skip it.
This debate has real significance. If a new life stage exists, societies need to design support services around the needs of an emerging population, who may not be defined around a specific age range. This has a real impact on how we spend our money on things like health care and education, or how companies market their products. If it’s not universal, however, it’s going to be difficult for institutions to get these activities right.
Whether strictly applicable to the field of developmental psychology or not, we at DECODE have been noticing the impact of the life stage on everything from civic participation to employee expectations and consumer behaviour. Young independents, as we call them (those out of school, and not with children of their own) are less likely to say they’ll vote or volunteer. It’s a period that appears to me marked by a distinct lack of connection to broader community.
Hening’s article raises as many questions as it answers, particularly for those in the demographic being discussed. But kudos to her, and to the Times, for at attempting to describe the demographic in an empathetic and considered manner.
Monday, August 23rd, 2010
Google CEO Eric Schmidt thinks that in the future it will be commonplace for young people to change their names to escape their digital past (see BBC article here). But is this the solution for avoiding having incriminating or sordid photos or words published online?
We asked some of our DECODER network members, aged 15-30, what they thought of Schmidt’s vision.
The first thing we heard is that Schmidt is a bit behind on this trend. Many people in our network said they post a lot of fake information online, thus keeping their real names ‘clean’. This results in the use of fake names on facebook, names that only ‘real’ friends know. Gen Y are also aware that employers may use digital information to find out more about them – most of them fully expecting future employers to look them up on at least google and facebook. Since stories of those unfortunate few who mess up in the online world end up being broadcast through many forms of media, including TV and online as well as newspapers, many more people are aware of what could go wrong, and learn from the story.
We also heard that people feel strongly that there are logical rules about reputation management online. One rule is that you should always be able to remove information about yourself. For example, of our network members told us she had a phone number listed from a speech she had given a few years ago. Se has tried contacting the organisers to take it off, but has so far been unsuccessful. To this young woman the issue wasn’t about trying to get away from the past, but making sure that people respect each others’ privacy.
In that case, perhaps what we need isn’t an easy way to change your name, but better laws to enable us to remove personal or confidential information from the online record books.
Friday, May 7th, 2010
DECODE’s Alison Hulme discusses the role of the superfan in social media marketing.
Published in Marketing Week May 7th 2010
The full article is available here.
Friday, May 7th, 2010
According to Robert Half Technology, more than half (54 percent) of Chief Information Officers interviewed said visiting social networking sites while at work is “completely prohibited” by company policy. The main reason for the ban is concern over reduced employee productivity. What does this mean for Generation Y, the 15-30 year olds entering our workforce in the age of social media?
Gen Y have grown up in a world where maths homework is done online from a laptop, not hand written in a square papered book. Their world of information is online. They like having lots of information on hand and picking through what they think is important. From DECODEs research we know that most young people connect online with people they already know face to face.
By taking away the tools our employees use to communicate, are we actually reducing productivity?
At a recent DECODE dialogue on the subject, a participant mentioned that social networking sites are the equivalent of the coffee machine where people gather to interact. It would have been interesting to ask those CIOs referenced above whether personal calls are still allowed. What about cigarette breaks? Most of Gen Y don’t smoke, does this mean they get less of a break time to rest their minds and be social?
Recruitment managers tell us that they increasingly use social media to find good hires. It’s efficient, productive, and helps them get to know people. Building their human networks allows for more authentic communication and incentivises employees to help find new recruits. Russell Herder at Ethos Business Law found that 8 out of 10 managers believe social media can enhance relationships with customers and build brand reputation. Managers feel such networking can be valuable in recruitment, as a customer service tool and can be used to enhance employee morale.
The Wasting Time at Work survey from Survey.com says that employees with unrestricted social networking access lose about 2 hours of work time per day. But social media use by employees also yields a 9% productivity boost. Surfing networks at work for pleasure actually increases our concentration levels. If social media in the workplace is a villain, it’s a false villain, and hiding underneath it are age-old work culture issues such as boredom and lack of engagement.
Although Gen Y are digital natives and know how to use the technology at hand, they are also a typical young generation in that they are rebellious, reckless and naive. Some, and I really mean a small minority, do stupid irresponsible things that would freak out most CIOs and most of their peers too. So, assuming we can treat social networking like the modern workplace’s coffee break, how can we best use these tools?
- Train the baby and keep the bathwater: train employees on the good and evil of social networks in the workplace. This reduces risk somewhat and informs employees so that the small minority thinks twice before doing something silly.
- Have strict policies about company information use on social network.
- Open up the good in social networks to all employees. Facebook is not the only social media site. Blocking one will lead to the use of another. Just ask the music industry.
- Re-evaluate every year.
For help building your generation Y employee engagement strategy, please email contact@decode.net
A version of this article was published in Guardian Public. Find the full version here.
Tuesday, December 8th, 2009
Lisan Jutras has an article in today’s Globe and Mail about how those pesky Facebook pages for “causes” don’t mean a thing. Labeling Facebook-style list joining as “slacktivism,” she writes:
While it feels good, it basically replaces other, more hackneyed expressions of what sensitive souls we are, such as “I like kittens and walks on the beach.” What it doesn’t replace is volunteer hours or money in the pockets of real charities.
For the sake making an argument, Jutras sets up a helpful straw man: you know, the one that isn’t volunteering or isn’t donating to charity because they’ve smugly done their bit highlighting a cause on their Twitter account.
If Jutras can find said straw man, I would love to see this person say as such in one of her columns. Some research would be nice. Recent DECODE research finds that, contrary to stereotype, people who engage in some form of online activism are, in fact, MUCH MORE likely to donate money or volunteer their time. Our recent Life Stage DNA study of those aged 15-39 found that 56% of those who are “digitally engaged” donated money in the last year. Only 32% of those who were not “digitally engaged” donated money. Similarly, 41% of those who are digitally engaged volunteered for a charity. Only 23% of those were not “digitally engaged” did.
This does not necessarily mean that participating in some sort of online engagement causes people to engage. We don’t know enough about what is likely a complex series of factors that encourage civic engagement.
A more likely explanation, however, is that those who are community-oriented are more likely to be active in both their digital and “real” lives. Joining a Facebook group doesn’t mean that you will also make a donation, or write a letter to an MP, or attend a protest as an immediate result. But it does likely mean that that issue is on your radar and that you might be more inclined – at some point – at least, to do something.
It’s a complex and emerging field of study. If only “lifestyle commentators” would treat it as such.
Tuesday, October 6th, 2009
James Surowiecki is one of the smartest business writers around, and his latest debunking of commonly-held myths about the American consumer shows why. According to data he cites, the high debt-level of the American consumer is not because of their fondness of gadgets, SUVs, or flat screen TVs — no the main culprit is the high cost of housing and medical care.
Citing Elizabeth Warren, he notes:
The idea that most Americans have been spending frivolously on consumer goods actually isn’t true. Instead, a hefty chunk of the increase in consumption in recent decades has been the result of higher housing prices, the rising cost of medical care, more spending on education, and childcare. A generation ago, Warren says, basics (housing costs, health insurance, transportation, education, and taxes) accounted for fifty-four per cent of the average family’s income. Today, they account for seventy-five per cent of it.
Surowiecki speculates that the average American consumer doesn’t actually have much room to save more. And while he’s not specifically talking about youth populations, stories like these are of particular resonance around DECODE offices, as we’ve spent much of our recent years trying to highlight the issues facing Young Independents (those living away from home and who have not started families of their own). Many wonder as to why young people have been putting off taking on many of the trappings of adulthood. Could it be that it’s just really expensive?
In Canada we’re insulated (to a certain degree) from the rapid explosion in health care costs in the U.S. But the explosion in housing costs is something that afflicts just about every major urban centre in the country. For almost 50 years, the notion that families live in homes they own has been almost sacrosanct. Could this expectation cause people to defer starting families?
Wednesday, September 2nd, 2009
Using the Pew Internet and the American Life’s latest data, two perspectives on online activities drive greater civic engagement, one from The Hill and one from Arts Technica. Hat Tip to Justin Stayshyn, whose Twitter feed is becoming like the radio.
Pew found (as we are also finding in Canada) that those who participate in online engagement activities are more likely to participate in “real-life” civic engagement. The study also found that 18-28 year-olds are twice as likely as the rest of the adult population to participate in online engagement activities. But, as both the Hill and Arts Technica note, socio-economic background is also a strong indicator of both people’s inclinations towards being online AND their overall level of civic participation.
Pew tried their best to get at what are the driving points behind the data, but you can see it straining under the weight of its setup: When comparing highest and lowest income earners, it found a relatively tiny gap between those who did and did not engage in online activities, but an enormous gap between those who engaged in real-world activities. But… those who are young are less likely to be affluent… but… less affluent are less likely to be online… but those young people are more likely to be online…but also less affluent?
You can see a somewhat broken mobius strip of “research speak” here. What would be most helpful is to study the larger sample of those aged 18-29. This would allow us to compare and contrast the various demographics more rigorously. As Pew itself notes, this means using research tools that reach young people on devices they use (such as cell phones or online panels). Pew admits their research was gathered using landline-only calls.
… Which leads to the convenient setup that DECODE has this data, for the U.K., the U.S., and Canada. Watch this space.
Thursday, July 30th, 2009
Here’s an interesting example of where a variety of social media tools are being used to help readers tackle some of the most difficult (and celebrated) novels of recent memory, David Foster Wallace’s Infinite Jest. This online book club connects regularly through a blog, a face book page and a Twitter account, allowing readers to share their thoughts in short bursts, or more long-form reflections.
Over 4,000 people have joined the Facebook group devoted to tackling the 1,000-plus page opus. On the Infinite Summer blog home page, readers are encouraged to share their thoughts (both positive and negative).
It sounds extremely nerdy. But the social aspect of reading is helping demystify Wallace’s endless (and imaginative) prose. Might this be a template for readers interested in tackling other weighty tomes?
Thursday, July 16th, 2009
Hats off to Morgan Stanley and Matthew Robson. With more than 90% of all coverage about teenagers and youth negative, it’s refreshing to see a global firm put a very young, smart intern front and centre. Well done. My company was born the same year as Matthew and we have spent the better part of the past fifteen years decoding young people in various parts of the world. We recently completed a study of 1000 British young people attitudes toward media and the Internet. Based on this knowledge I would like to offer these eight additional points of context to Mr. Robson’s excellent report.
1. The concept of understanding ‘teenagers’ from is flawed the start. 13-19 year olds as a group cross over a few levels of schooling and as most 13 and 19 year olds will tell you there is a big gap in life experience. Key transitions like driving, legal drinking, jobs and voting often split this group into at least two realities. Each transition has an impact on media behavior.
2. Don’t underestimate the significance gender plays at this stage of life. Years ago Calvin Klein launched CK1 cologne to meet the growing trend of androgyny among young people. The pendulum has definitely swung back especially in media use.
3. Advertising does work. It just has to be thoughtful, disruptive (usually means funny, but not always) and well positioned. Rarely do advertisers get all three of these right, so the generation born with the remote finds it natural to look for a better option. Young people have always been skeptical towards advertising, because they are the group most often manipulated.
4. Bravo BBC. You are proof that traditional brands can learn new tricks. Public networks worldwide take note. The iPlayer was a brilliant move to bring in the next generation on their terms. It also positioned the BBC second, just behind Google in DECODE’s youth brand rankings in the UK.
5. “Free for all” is certainly a youth rallying cry. To some degree it always has been, but now it’s more the expected norm. Perception and reality are worth noting. Bolt-ons, surprises, access, are a starting point not a value added service. Television and the Internet are rarely free. Someone else pays for it. Even free wi-fi at McDonalds comes with a side of chips.
6. I don’t believe the DJ is dead. They filter content for the masses and alleviate the tyranny of choice that many young people face.
7. Newspapers aren’t dead yet either, but they should hire more DJs. Last year at a global conference of newspaper execs hosted by the World Association of Newspapers, I revealed that young people feel TV is a more credible news source than newspapers. This was part of a study on youth news media trends called Youth Media DNA. The fact is young people probably consume a lot of newspaper content without knowing it. Newspapers need to create their own version of the BBC iPlayer (I don’t mean a video player specifically) to show young people what value they get from newspaper content. Oh, and they need to provide it free for a while, change editorial to focus on issues that are more interesting to young people, use parents as allies and build relevant relationships with schools. I’m just getting started.
8. The size of youth social networks may be overblown. Most people are surprised at how few online friends young people have. On average teenagers have 90 online friends. But while that seems low to some, it is also a bit misleading. More than half of teenagers have less than 20 online friends – meaning that while a minority have tonnes of friends, most have a few.
All fuller response to the original Morgan Stanley report written by DECODE intern Ben Doherty is available for download here.
Tuesday, July 14th, 2009
According to Bram Van Den Burgh at the Rotterdam School of Management, those purchasing green goods derive more personal benefit from image enhancement than the actual result of their purchases.
A recent article in the New York Times by Robin Marantz Hening explores the evolution of adolescence and how psychologists are struggling to describe the “unfinished” nature of twentysomething adults. According to some, like “Emerging Adulthood” author, Jeffrey Arnett, the twenties are an under-recognized stage in adult development, created by a rapid change in our economic and cultural space. In an information-based economy, Arnett sees“…the need for more education to survive in an information-based economy; fewer entry-level jobs even after all that schooling; young people feeling less rush to marry because of the general acceptance of premarital sex, cohabitation and birth control; and young women feeling less rush to have babies given their wide range of career options and their access to assisted reproductive technology if they delay pregnancy beyond their most fertile years.”
