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, July 19th, 2010
There is nothing worse than being stood up. But in the next 10 years, that waiting, wondering feeling will be gone.
Generation X, like the generations before it, came of age in a world where meetings for business or pleasure had to be committed to in advance, and could not be cancelled at the last minute via mobile or digital technology – at least not without the risk of standing up the person in question. A change in time of a business meeting required being able to get through to a contact’s office well enough in advance to catch them at their desk or leave a message that was guaranteed to get to them before they left for the meeting. A change of heart over a date required calling a home landline and leaving a, “Sorry but …” message days in advance. Failure in any of the above situations resulted in one half of the proposed meeting left waiting under the designated tree, in the designated café, or by the designated street corner, until they resigned themselves to the fact that the other half either was in mortal danger or had no intention of showing. Standing someone up was the ultimate slam (and sometimes revenge). Being “stood up” was the ultimate in hurt and humiliation, not to mention wasted time (and money).
For generation Z – the children of gen X, born in the Mobile Internet Age – the concept of being stood up, either in business or in romantic life, simply will not apply. One may say someone “bailed at the last minute,” even though the suspicion is the excuse given was actually code for “I want to cancel,” but one is never, literally, left standing. (The same is of course now true for most of generations Y and X too – apart from those older gen-Xers who stoically refuse to wholly embrace the digital age.) But what impact has this ability to organize things “on the fly” and to be “ultra-spontaneous” had, not only on the way we organize and behave within our social and business connections, but also on our psychology as individuals and society?
First, while commitment may well be just as strong, the desire to change one’s mind interferes with how this is lived out. The business deal may be a definite go, as may the conviction of a possible romance, but the desire to be “free” to change our minds has been promoted to the number one spot. Second, the inclination to banish fear has been given legs. We now no longer feel it is part of the process to experience an element of uncertainty in regards to the other person’s intention (although of course it still is, we just hide it under layers of reassuring last minute texts – “gonna b L8 c u in 10”). Freedom and fear are key here, yet perhaps horribly misunderstood. After all, one person’s “freedom” to change things at the last minute forces the other person to do the same thing. So begins a spiral of spontaneity where no one in the ”chain” of meetings can absolutely commit to anything. And a person’s fear in “taking the risk” of being at the designated spot regardless ought to perhaps be part of the self-recognition that we really care about this date or this business opportunity. Fear of failure (and dealing with it when it happens) is perhaps a useful part of human interaction.
On the other hand, perhaps a separation of business and pleasure is necessary here. While it may still be the case that a potential romance is better served by the kind of promise and conviction that last-minute changes via text message simply cannot substantiate, perhaps today’s business world is more productive given the tools for added spontaneity and contingency. Global transactions, mobile offices, flexible practices, and entrepreneurial partnering would certainly struggle to thrive as they have in the late 20th/early 21st century without the ability to arrange and rearrange with ease. If the obsolescence of being stood up has taken some of the stomach-churning fear/excitement from dating, it has simultaneously removed some collateral damage from the world of business.
So maybe no more of that looking-at-your-watch-every-minute-sinking-feeling for Generation Z. But for their own good, let’s hope they can stand up for spontaneity in spite of the risk … even in business.
http://www.themarknews.com/articles/1873-being-stood-up
Wednesday, May 6th, 2009
I recently read a chapter on “remix culture” from The Pirate’s Dilemma, by Matt Mason. The next day I was speaking with a group of Canadian leaders about Canada new place in the world. These two thoughts came together. A. Canada as a country of immigrants is all about remixing culture – sometimes for the worse, but mostly for the better. You can do away with elements of the original culture and only keep the great stuff. Then mix it in with others doing the same. Are remixes always better than the original? I’m not sure, but I like the idea. B. Young people are in a constant state of remix. Remixing family traditions, remixing knowledge, remixing creative content. So are Canadian youth the driving force behind creating the ultimate remix for the world to see? Hope so…..
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.”
