How many marketers does it take to change a light bulb

“Who is the campaign for?”

“Gen Z.”

“All of them?”

“Obviously there are segments.”

“Which segment?”

“Digitally native value-seekers who care about authenticity.”

“So, people who use phones, dislike overpaying and prefer fewer lies?”

The brief has taken millions of strangers born across nearly two decades and discovered they possess three qualities shared by most functioning adults. Everyone nods because a named generation sounds more scientific than “youngish people we hope will buy this”.

Shared historical experience can matter. Entering work during a recession may affect financial expectations. Encountering a technology at twelve can differ from adopting it at forty. Those are claims worth testing against age, income, housing, parenthood and place.

The lazy version bundles those circumstances into birth year, finds an average and writes a personality profile. A well-paid graduate living with parents and a care worker supporting two children can share a generation while having almost no useful commercial constraint in common.

The commercial test is brutally simple. Does the generational label change the message, offer, timing or channel more usefully than a description of the customer’s current situation? “Young renters moving within thirty days who split household bills” permits decisions. “Gen Z craves connection” permits a mood board.

The revised campaign brief keeps the age data. It divides movers from renewers and people paying alone from those sharing costs. The document is saved and circulated before lunch.

Behavioural principles

Behavioural ideas at play in this post

Short, plain-English explanations of the principles behind this post, with links to related books and examples in the archive.