Generations X, Y, & Z

The impact that Generation Y, ages 13-25, will have on urban planning is already becoming apparent.

I've read about and observed first-hand the many small agricultural communities reeling from massive population loss, and the mid-size industrial cities dealing with the same issue, as well as struggling with keeping crime under control and selling people on the notion that it is important to rebuild these cities' urban cores.

Many people might ask why this has any connection with younger generations. Why is it important to invest in cities when its citizens move out to the suburbs? Why is it important to rebuild town centers when those young people fortunate enough to go to college will just move away after school?

Because Generation Y, the largest generation in American history, wants to live in the city.

Twenty years ago, Washington, D.C. was renowned as the murder capital of the world. D.C. didn’t concern itself with urban renewal because residents were cocooned in the suburbs. The same is true for Minneapolis, once known as ‘Murderapolis’, as well as most large cities.

In the late 1980s and early ‘90s, urban renewal spread across the United States. Cities started renovating and rebuilding to include housing, shopping, and entertainment for all walks of life.

Author Richard Florida studies the vitality of America’s communities. He was recently interviewed by the Washington Business Journal and explained the move back to urban areas was spurred by social and generational change.

In the 1930s, most Americans lived in small farming communities. In the 1940s and ‘50s, the automobile played a large part in travel and exposed America to new landscapes and bustling cities. In the 1960s and ‘70s, racial turbulence and civil unrest during wartime drove families to the suburbs and smaller towns and large cities both faltered.

Many Baby Boomers pursued the ‘white picket fence’ dream – building big houses with sprawling lawns to give their children everything they didn’t have.

The older Xers followed suit and McMansions were soon being built to accommodate their desire for big houses on their prohibitive, young professional incomes. (Financial analysts would say the Xers’ desire to have exactly what our parents had right out of college is what created insurmountable heaps of debt for our generation.)

What will tomorrow’s communities look like?

Undoubtedly, there will be a move back to urban areas.

Generation Y is pre-disposed to living in urban areas. They grew up with technology, credit cards, and Starbucks. It’s no surprise their focus on community and convenience demands productivity and a short commute to whatever resource they need.

Furthermore, Generation X, and especially Y, has placed considerable emphasis on work-life balance. They are willing to forego a large home in the suburbs and the long commute it requires for a smaller home closer to work. Gen Y is dedicated to the environment and the use of mass transit appeals to them.

Commuting in exchange for a bigger house was a deal Baby Boomers were willing to make for their family. For younger generations, that’s not a reasonable trade-off.

According to the Washington Business Journal, Gen Y will be 30% of the population by 2012.
Is your city or town ready for Y?

Y will move where there is a place for them, and as the largest generation in America, they will be a tremendous economic boon for any city offering jobs, diversity, transit systems, technology, coffeehouses, parks and recreation, and economic vitality.

The fact is, few small towns in America will be able to capture the citizenship of Gen Y.

Labels: Generation X, Generation Y, McMansions, Richard Florida, small towns, surburbs, urban renewal

The nation's three largest service club organizations - Lions Clubs International, Rotary International, and Kiwanis International - have made recent attempts to reinvent century-old traditions, recruit younger members, and reverse membership declines.

Why is membership down? Partly because we're a busier society and partly because there are more opportunities to volunteer in the community than in years past. Groups like Habitat for Humanity don’t require volunteers to be members and pay dues.

But membership is also down because today's young professionals aren't joining. And they aren't joining either because they perceive the clubs to be outdated and irrevelant, they haven't been invited to join, or they feel they don't belong.

What are three of the nation's largest clubs doing to woo young members?

I gleaned several publications to collect the information below. I believe businesses and associations alike can learn a lot about how these organizations are responding to crisis and working to bridge the generation gap.


Kiwanis - New Leadership
Kiwanis International membership is at 260,000, down 20 percent from its peak of 324,727 in 1992. The organization focuses on serving children of the world.

Historically, the organization has been guided by an international president elected annually. What the board wanted was someone to focus long term on building a bigger organization; someone who was a change agent.

Last year, the association hired its first CEO -- Rob Parker, former CEO of Sunbeam -- to accomplish its goal of reaching 1 million members by its 100th birthday in 2015.

Under Parker's reign, Kiwanis has been positioned to think like a fast-growing organization.

So that all employees, including himself, constantly think of the million member goal, Parker placed in his office a giant LED clock, which in red numbers counts down the year, day, hours and minutes until 2015.

Parker revamped an old lounge where managers reclined for a meeting every month or so. Managers now stand around the table during a 10-minute 'daily huddle.' After the meeting, those managers then address their own departments so by 9:30 a.m. everybody in the organization is aligned.

Parker is focused on outreach to younger generations and the use of more technology. Online Kiwanis clubs have been created, including one with worldwide membership.

Young Professional clubs have been organized as well. The DC Metro Young Professionals club has a monthly business meeting that lasts no longer than 45 minutes and organizes several service projects via an interactive calendar on its Web site. The club doesn't take attendance or require participation in a set number of projects.

Kiwanis is also developing family clubs for both parents with childcare provided, and the club boasts the fact that it builds leaders at every level—from the youngest Kiwanis Kids all the way through several youth programs and adult programs.


Lions - A New Brand
In 1978, Lions Clubs International had more than 570,000 members in the USA. That number has declined to 400,000. The Lions work to eradicate blindness.

Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, a Lion, nominated Lions for the Nobel Peace Prize, and the organization received a distinguished ranking in July 2007 when Financial Times named Lions the #1 global NGO (non-governmental organization).

However, organizational surveys revealed the club had a strong reputation, but one that isn’t widely promoted or understood. The club also discovered that other organizations were expending 25 to 80 times more than they were on media.

Lions leaders have set out to reverse this trend with a major brand renewal effort. Guided by consultants , Lions leaders are undertaking an initiative to help people understand who the Lions are and what they do.

In addition to making updating the historic logo, the club is revamping THE LION magazine and revamping its Web site. The organization will also launch a targeted ad campaign in North America and engage marketing firms in Latin America, Europe, South Asia and East Asia to continue the thrust of the North America ad campaign.

Lions is hopeful the renewed branding and marketing efforts will help the organization reach more people and engage more members. In the meantime, like Kiwanis, Lions has chartered dozens of new family clubs.


Rotary - New Technology
Rotary International had a peak U.S. membership of 421,953 in 1993. It has been below 400,000 since 1999. Rotary humanitarian activities is helping stamp out polio.

Rotary introduced New Generations month for the month of September, identifying that one of the key elements of an effective Rotary Club is the development of leaders. Rotary is encouraging club leaders to prepare younger members for leadership positions and now offers a leadership development skills training program.

Rotary recently launched a new Web site, featuring a problem-solving forum. The topic for the month of September was a lack of younger members and Rotarians posted their ideas for resolving the recruiting and retention challenges. The site also features a copy of the New Generations issue of Rotary International Interactive e-newsletter featuring links to YouTube videos created by Interact (Rotary) Clubs.

The site also features Rotarian Video Magazine (RVM), a DVD series that showcases Rotary projects and people from around the world; Rotary Images, a photo library containing thousands of images of Rotarians and Rotary projects from around the world; and Rotary e-cards.


*How do you think these organizations are doing? If you have ideas or comments to share, I'd love to hear from you!

Labels: Kiwanis, Lions Clubs, membership declines in service clubs, Rotary

What do Warren Buffett, Walt Disney and Ross Perot all have in common? Besides being iconic American businessmen, all three have newspaper carrier on their boyhood résumés. But don't bother looking for leaders of tomorrow's corporate America to be walking down your block at dawn: Your newspaper carrier today is most likely an adult in a car.

As recently as 1990, nearly 70% of newspaper carriers in the U.S. were teens. But that number dropped to 18% in 2004, and more declines are likely, according to the Newspaper Association of America.

The end of the boyhood (or girlhood) paper route reflects a dramatic but little-noticed trend: Teen unemployment has hit historic highs in the last three years.

How is this possible? Employers are desperate for people they can hire and train and there's ample opportunity to fill these slots with Generation Y (ages 13-25), the largest generation in American history. Yet we're in the midst of the lowest teen market penetration in 50 years.

According to data gathered for the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 37% of teens nationwide worked in the summer of 2006 -- nearly 11% fewer than were working in 1989.

Are teens working less because they are too busy with their MySpace pages, disdainful of teen job opportunities, or just plain lazy? Employers are quick to support such theories, but there is no data to back them up.

The fact is, in the last six years employers have hired more immigrants and workers 55 and older than teens.

For the summer of 2006, according to the labor bureau statistics, teens had an unemployment rate of 16.5% -- four times higher than that of adults during the same period. Labor analysts explain that if adult employment fell by the same rate teen employment has in the last 10 years, it would be greatest job loss in American history since the Depression.

Should employers care about these trends? Why not continue to bypass teens in favor of immigrants, older workers, or even workers in other countries?

Because America's private sector needs a succession plan.

Many employers feel their efforts to reach and understand Generation Y have been frustrating and fruitless, and hiring older workers is an easier route. But doing what's easier isn't the same as doing what's best.

We're already seeing the fallout of overlooking the teen workforce.

Recent studies show that entry-level employees, including graduates of four-year colleges, are lacking critical workforce skills, such as written communications, leadership skills, professionalism, and problem-solving.

Employers site Gen Y's lack of work ethics as the cause, when in fact as teens they didn't have the employment opportunities of previous generations because employers refused to hire them.

Furthermore, while business leaders have encouraged schools to do more work-readiness training, the federal No Child Left Behind policy has put a new emphasis on testing and achievement standards. As a result, vocational programs have fallen out of fashion and many students--with the encouragement of parents--are delaying work experience to focus on academics.

Obviously, the current pattern of 'educate now, employ later' is not working. Our high-tech, fast-moving economy demands the expertise of an educated and prepared workforce.

American teens need the opportunity to gain critical skills from early work experiences--not to mention that without widespread teen employment, the future of our workforce will be compromised.

True, Generation Y brings new expectations (and challenges) to a traditional workforce. As the most nurtured, protected, and provided for generation in history, they want ample feedback, increasing responsibilities, the respect and attention of their managers, access to technology, flex-time, and the opportunity to share their opinions.

True, they aren't as likely to pursue jobs they perceive as being redudant or meaningless, and they willingly leave jobs that offer no opportunities for advancement and employers who treat them as peons.

But today's teens were raised during an era when everyone on the soccer team received trophies. They were raised with technology and video gaming and few have had to answer to a 'boss'.

While they are high-achieving, multi-tasking, media-savvy, tech-savvy, globally-minded and diverse, today's teens need jobs to learn from adults other than their teachers or parents. They need jobs to experience all the joys and frustrations of work, including acceptance, goal-setting, teamwork, constructive criticism, and failure.

How can the United States continue to compete in a global economy if the entering workforce is made up of graduates who lack the skills they need? Is 'adequate' good enough?

Adequate is certainly not acceptable when you are competing in a global economy that's driven by innovation and technology and facing a massive exodus of workers. By 2010, 40% of our workforce will be eligible to retire. Every business and industry will be scrambling to fill its ranks with qualified employees.

And it's our responsibility, as businesses, associations, schools, and non-profits, to make sure immigrants and people over the age of 55 aren't the only ones qualified for the jobs.

Labels: educate now employ later, Generation Y, hiring trends, Newspaper Association of America, No Child Left Behind, teen unemployment

Last week I spoke for two associations in Washington, D.C. - the National Fraternal Congress of America and General Federation of Women's Clubs. Both of these associations are concerned about their aging memberships. Like most associations out there they are agonizing over the fact they can’t get the younger generations involved as members, much less as leaders and volunteers.

The fact is younger generations are willing to lead and volunteer, and the ASAE & The Center for Association Leadership's new study, The Decision to Volunteer: Why People Give Their Time and How You Can Engage Them, Generations X and Y association members are slightly less engaged than older association members as volunteers, but actually believe more strongly in the importance of volunteering.

I would argue that Xers and Ys are less engaged simply because associations haven't figured out how to engage them.

For example, I'm not surprised that two-thirds of the 26,305 members who participated in the study said they look for opportunities to connect volunteering to their professional development. Xers and Ys in particular want to know how their participation in an association (or as an employee in a business, for that matter) is going to benefit them personally, professionally, and benefit their community. That's their three-way test before engaging in anything.

The associations that consider these criteria, develop actual benefits and outcomes to being engaged as a leader or volunteer, and then actively market those benefits and outcomes will stand a better chance of engaging younger generations.

I'm also not surprised the study suggests volunteers at all levels want recognition and support of their efforts. Younger generations will disengage from those things they feel powerless to influence or for which they receive no recognition.

Historically, associations have been very hierarchical - celebrating years of membership and service and focusing on the 'big hitters' sitting on the board and leading committees. But an association doesn't rely solely on board members and committee chairs. An association needs membership recruiters, ambassadors, mentors, fundraisers, event planners, and so on and so forth.

Xers and Ys are changing the workforce with their tendencies towards teamwork, collaboration, mentoring, mutual respect and rewards. This is making business less about preserving seniority and more about fostering relationships and the same changes are occuring in associations.

Like it or not, these generations were raised to value relationships, inclusion, and diversity. They are the most nurtured and provided for generations in history. They expect associations to make a place for them at the decision-making table; they expect to be invited to get involved; and they want recognition and support every step of the way.

There are associations out there that believe their efforts to reach younger members have been fruitless and that younger generations pose a great challenge to their futures.

I would argue that younger generations pose a great opportunity -- if you only take the time to understand them.

Labels: ASAE and The Center for Association Leadership, General Federation of Women's Clubs, Generations X and Y, National Fraternal Congress of America, The Decision to Volunteer

Several months back, when both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were campaigning for the Democratic nomination, I posed the question in this blog: Will it be women or children first?

While Hillary was using her proven political ties and tried-and-true campaign tactics, Obama centered his campaign on 'change' and focused on the younger generation of voters.

Many laughed at Obama for focusing on Gen Y-- the generation with the least number of people old enough to vote, the least exposure to politics, and who were the most likely to shirk their voting responsibilities.

Obviously, the 'children' had more influence than the political veterans realized and Obama became the Democratic nominee.

But now that Republican nominee Senator John McCain has selected Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to be his vice presidential running mate, the question looms again: Will it be women or children first? Will the McCain camp be able to sway young voters with the prospect of bringing a woman into office?

Undoubtedly, Palin is proving to be very popular with delegates to the Republican National Convention. Analysts have said McCain's decision to bring Palin onto the ticket has energized the party and increased its odds of success in the election.

But will it be enough?

Since the nominees were named, much has been made of the 25-year age gap between Democratic nominee Barack Obama, 47, and Republican senator John McCain, 72, and their abilities to appeal to younger voters.

This is the first campaign in history when a generational divide between candidates and voters is so apparent. There has actually been more emphasis on each party's ability to market itself than there has been on their party's messages!

From the beginning, Obama has been marketed like a high-end consumer brand, with seamless graphics, a rising-sun logo, music videos, and a mellow aura that isn't polarizing and appeals to younger voters.

His campaign has made ample use of Web-based social media to drive participation and contributions and his sites boast nearly 2 million supporters on his MySpace and Facebook pages, while McCain has fewer than 330,000 supporters. Obama's YouTube videos have received 60 million views compared with McCain's 14 million.

In an August poll by the Harvard Institute of Politics, Obama had a 23-percentage-point lead over McCain among likely voters aged 18 to 24. The poll also found that there is a gap between the enthusiasm supporters express for the respective candidates: More than 4 in 5 young voters say they are excited to vote for Obama, while only 56% say they are excited about voting for McCain.

According to the Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement, in the 2004 Presidential election, voters ages 18-to-24-year-old were evenly split between parties: 35% called themselves Republicans, 39% were Democrats.

It will be fascinating to observe what happens in this election. Will young voters remain true to party lines? Will one party prove to be more influential than the other with young voters?

In any case, one lesson is already apparent: Don't overlook young America. They are 80 million strong. They are influential, they do care about America's future, and their voices will be heard.

Labels: Barack Obama, Generation Y, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, presidential election, Sarah Palin