The The Hobgoblin of Lazy Marketing and Research Minds

For those who don’t click through to comments on yesterday’s post, I feel I must repeat here Ronni Bennett’s comment about the use (and misuse) of generational labels:

This is a topic that irritates me at the other end of the generational divide. Elders - by which I mean anyone older than Boomers - have been erased from existence by the media which have been using "boomer" as a synonym for "old" for several years. But elders' needs and interests differ dramatically from all but the very oldest boomers as you have pointed out here in the past in your posts on Carl Jung's seven tasks of aging, among others. And boomers too can hardly be lumped together. The youngest are still raising families, saving for their kids' college educations and beginning to hit the peaks of the their careers - a very different life-outlook from the oldest boomers just now reaching the age of eligibility for early Social Security. Generational naming and references seem to me to be the hobgoblin of lazy marketing - and research - minds.

Ronni’s second sentence bears deep reflection. In it she calls attention to the fact that people older than boomers are being marginalized. For years, I’ve heard an endless stream of complaints from those working in older markets about everyone dying at age 50 according to Madison Avenue. Until recently, reports on media consumption did not cover media usage by people 50 and older. AARP mockingly derided this fact with a controversial add showing people turning 50 being stuffed into body bags.

Now, many of those who long criticized Madison Avenue for ignoring consumers 50 and older are doing the same thing by writing off people who are older than boomers. Ronni is squarely on target with her protest of this development. Now re-read her last sentence:

Generational naming and references seem to me to be the hobgoblin of lazy marketing - and research - minds.

Neither she nor I claim that differences between generations don’t exist. They do. But those differences tend to be more a matter of style than of substance. Sixty-two-year-old boomers today have the same core needs as their 62-year-old grandparents had. The former simply have more options in seeking satisfaction of those needs.

I can rightfully claim to be well-read in adult development psychology. I have never come across any developmental psychologist who claimed that generational differences exist at comparable ages. Now, we have brain scientists fortifying this idea. Experience shapes brains in a number of somewhat predictable ways. The more years of experience a person has, the more different his or her brain is from people half as old. But the differences fade when comparisons are made with age peers.

Changes in the brain’s architecture generate changes in the brain’s cognitive processes as well as in the worldviews, order of values and strategies for needs satisfaction that emerge from brain processes. These are not generation specific. They are developmental stage specific.

Today, countless companies are basing marketing decisions on poorly grounded claims about generational attributes. Yesterday, I read an article talking about the demise of the Sigrid Olsen fashion brand. The articles said:

"It is a curious development in the fickle business of fashion that clothing labels like Ms. Olsen’s, made by and for the baby boomer generation, are among those being hardest hit by the current economic turmoil and retail retrenchment."

 It is not curious in the least – that labels by boomers ... “are among those hardest hit by the current economic turmoil and retail entrenchment.”

Few in the fashion game have come to terms with the twin facts that population growth under 50 is basically nada and that consumer spending reaches its peak around age 47 – interestingly, the average age a woman becomes a grandmother for the first time.

Boomers are at a different place in their existential evolution. Boomer women over 50 tend to be less consumed with fashion concerns than women of fewer years. That obviously has a suppressing effect on cash register ring-ups. The current economic downturn will of course adversely affect sales results. However, that is a short term phenomenon. Longer term is the effect of a steadily rising median age and close to zero population growth in the under-50 adult population. The answer to the challenges posed by this cannot be fruitfully addressed by basing analysis on attributes that supposedly distinguish a generation as being the only generation like it in all history.

As Ronni says, “Generational naming and references seem to me to be the hobgoblin of lazy marketing - and research - minds.”

______________

Ronni Bennett has two blogs, the longer sustaining of which is As Time Goes By: http://ronnibennett.typepad.com/ If you have any interest in middle age and older markets from any perspective you owe it to yourself to become a regular reader of this blog. Her second blog is mesmerizing. It’s called The Elder Storytelling Place: http://www.ronnibennett.typepad.com/elderstorytelling/

I promise you that over time you will learn more about the worldviews, values and behavior of older people – boomers or otherwise – by reading these two blogs on a regular basis than by reading, shall we say, 90 percent of the research executed in the name of boomers, Generation X or whatever.

 

Comments

[Ronni Bennett]

In an coincidence with the fashion references in your post today, David, my post yesterday at Time Goes By, titled Elder Fashion - An Oxymoron is about the near total lack of clothing designed to fit the shape of older women's bodies. Even a couple of men chimed in with comments relating similar difficulties in finding clothes to fit their newly old bodies.

You're right, David, that older women are less concerned with au courant style than when we were younger. But that doesn't mean we don't want to be well-dressed and appropriate both to our age and to individual occasions. Nevertheless, fashion houses have ignored us and even the few who purport to outfit older women take their cues from what younger women want.

For example, the only way I've been able to find sweaters that aren't clingy, cut too low or are transparent is to shop in the men's and boys' departments - not an ideal solution, so I spend the bare minimum.

What puzzles me is the economics. Can it be true that our culture is so deeply ageist that fashion corporations are willing to forgo millions or, more probably, billions in cash register ring-ups by ignoring an age group that is about 38 percent (and growing) of the entire female population to be perceived as kewl?

Thank you for the shoutouts for my blogs.

[David Wolfe]

Ronni, I did read your blog on fashion. Thanks for bringing it to my readers' attention.

You said: What puzzles me is the economics. Can it be true that our culture is so deeply ageist that fashion corporations are willing to forgo millions or, more probably, billions in cash register ring-ups by ignoring an age group that is about 38 percent (and growing) of the entire female population to be perceived as kewl?

The answer is yes. The sad thing is that rejection of these markets is more reflexive than rational. When asked why they ignore these markets marketers who do so come back with groundless assertions they have never examined critically. It's selective perception at work that is not directly willful. Belief follows need. They need to construct arguments that keep their present beliefs intact. To change those beliefs means a lot of intellectual destruction and reconstruction. It's a helluva lot easier to keep believing what they already believe.

DBW

[Ronni Bennett]

If that's so, David, I don't have a lot of confidence in U.S. business in general. The speed of change these days is breathtaking and businesses that don't keep up (just my untutored opinion) will fail or, at least, will see their revenue drop.

What frustrates me is that I know a lot of what needs to be designed for elder women. But I can't draw a straight line, so can't sketch them and I don't know the first thing about the fashion trade or business. So I wait.

I keep thinking someone will come along soon and see the money to be made off elder women. Or maybe not. Maybe I'm doomed to die in ugly, badly-fitted clothes.

[David Wolfe]

Ronni,

My mother might have had complaints about being ignored by the fashionista crowd every bit as much as you only in her time I could offer no hope. However, as America becomes more accustomed to an aging society, the values of older people continue growing more prominent, marketing becomes more intergenerational (ageless), and the idea of co-creation (providers and customers collaborating on product design and delivery) become commonplace (as is already beginning to happen), you will be able to avoid the ignominious fate of dying in ugly, badly-fitted clothes. I promise you that.

David

[Ronni Bennett]

Tee hee. I can only hope you are right.

[joared]

Labels and categorization are used and abused everywhere -- not just marketing -- over-simplification. Keep trying to educate the advt./marketing folk to think outside their cramped box.

[Jake B.]

Lumping a large number of people in too a label is essentially the foundation of marketing as we knew it. However, more and more niche markets are becoming increasingly important. Cutting threw the fat of a "baby-boomer" group you are going to find numerous different groups with-in and on either side of the so-called age range. Many marketers miss out on an untapped market because they only focus on mass marketing. This economy may just spur a more niche related focus.

"Focusing solely on your base will lose another's face."

~Ditley SEO Company

[mike m]

I agree with joared labels and categorization is used and abused everywhere. Staying innovative is getting more and more difficult in these "internet" times.

- web design studio