Cycles of History  

In their fascinating book Generations:  The History of America’s Future, 1584-2069, William Strauss and Neil Howe outline a fascinating theory of generational cycles in history that has numerous practical implications for the world of business.  Below, I will briefly summarize the broad outlines of their model.  Over the next several weeks, I'll be adding application-based material related to retention, supervision, employee motivation, and more.

 
Cohort Generations

As Strauss and Howe use the term, a cohort generation is a group of persons born within the same general time period (usually about 20 years), who share the same set of defining experiences.  Because of the length of a cohort generation relative to the actuarial human lifespan, there are between 4 and 6 cohort generations alive in America at any given time.  As noted below, there are four basic types of cohort generations that recur, in Strauss and Howe’s theory of history, in a predictable, cyclic fashion.

Social Moments

A social moment is a key, defining time and series of events that shapes the entire culture and, in a significant sense, ushers in a new phase in history.  There are two contrasting kinds of social moments which, Strauss and Howe assert, occur in an alternating sequence:    

Note that the lapse of time between like social moments is about 80 years, or four cohort generations, in length.  This is no accident, as we’ll see below.  It also suggests that we’ll be due for another secular crisis around the year 2020 (give or take about 5 years).  Hence we’ll soon find out how valid Strauss and Howe’s model is… stay tuned.

Four Generational Types

Based on the above concepts, we can define the four generational types as follows.    

Because of the influence of social moments as mediated by the age (phase or stage of life) during which they are experienced by the different cohort generations, the four generational types tend to take on different personalities or values.  Of course, these are generalizations that apply only to the “group persona”, not universally to every member within a given cohort generation:

What fuels the generational cycle is a tendency for each cohort generation to react to the excesses of the previous generation.   Since we tend to form our sense of personal identity primarily during the ages 15-25, cultural events that occur during that time frame tend to be central to our sense of self.  Thus,  

Application 1:  Ethics, including business ethics

Here are some thoughts about how the four generational cohorts may differ in terms of dealing with moral considerations.

Idealist generations (e.g., born 1943-1960) -- come of age in a time of spiritual awakening

Adolescence to rising adulthood:  Reacting against what they perceive as the bland social conformism of their parents (mostly Adaptives), Idealists are typically motivated by radical transformism of some sort -- a break with what are perceived as bland social structures that are devoid of intrinsic meaning.  Often, young Idealists' approach to life is defined by a personally transforming experience that leads to an (inward, if not outward) radical break with the recent past (the outer-driven world of their parents), though sometimes it means a radical return to neglected values of the more distant past (often, to the values of a previous Idealist generation).  Values and ideals are central.  A core motivation is to transform society (beginning with internal transformation).

Rising adulthood to midlife:  Driven by the fire and passion of their intrinsic ideals, young Idealist adults can easily clash with peers who hold different and opposing values with equal strength and intensity.  Social consensus begins to collapse, and the marketplace of ideas and values becomes increasingly polarized, even balkanized.  The civility and compromise of the previous era, so dear to Adaptive adults, is now viewed by Idealists as a form of hypocrisy or uncommitted conformism.

Midlife to elderhood:  In later life (which is when Idealists typically make their best contributions, having achieved enough balance to attend sufficiently to the outer pragmatic world), Idealists often become the "Grey Champions" or the guardians of the moral values of society.  Paradoxically, they are sometimes perceived as rigid moralists by younger persons who fail to see the inner fire within that motivates them.  (Note how Prohibition-type social movements typically occur when Idealists are older adults:  the current increasingly anti-smoking climate of contemporary society may be an example.)  The typical elder Idealist would be shocked that others see him or her as a Puritan, when s/he still sees her/himself as a contra mundum revolutionary! 

Reactive generations (e.g., born 1961-1981) -- come of age in the aftermath of a spiritual awakening (inner-driven era)

Adolescence to rising adulthood:  Reacting against what they perceive as childhood neglect resulting from the excessive idealism and narcissism of their parents (mostly Idealists), Reactives are typically motivated by pragmatic survivalism -- making it in a world that they perceive (with some justification) as hostile to, or uncaring about them, or at least a world that has left them to their own devices, forced them to "raise themselves".  Seeing the world as a Darwinian, "dog-eat-dog" jungle, young Reactives often view the ideals of their parents as hopelessly out of touch with the harsh, cold realities of life.  Often they define themselves as the "true realists" who "know what life is really all about".  While sometimes outwardly cynical about morality, in fact young Reactives do have a moral code of their own -- a "culture of honor" or code duello style morality that emphasizes the attainment of status through competition and material success. 

Rising adulthood to midlife:  Often feeling confined by the "creeping moralism" (as they see it) of society, they may react with a strong emphasis on tangible, material success as a counterpoint.  They may seek a life of conspicuous consumption, of blatant hedonism, of a search for Hemingway-style excitement, or of high-risk, high-reward economic or vocational success.  Doing (not talking or thinking) is their watchword.  They may, however, feel caught between the "positive" values of their elders (Idealists) and their children (Civics) and may begin to feel like -- as the previous Reactive generation actually labeled themselves in the 1920's -- a "lost" generation.

Midlife to elderhood:  If they rise to the looming secular crisis, they may become the effective Patton-style leaders -- getting results even if means breaking all the rules.  If not, they may age poorly, and feel as devalued by their Civic juniors as they felt they were by their Idealist elders.  Yet, as prototypical survivors, they may continue to define success in terms of realism and continuing to fight the battle of life on a day by day basis.

Civic generations (e.g., born 1982-2002;  or, those still living born before 1927) -- come of age in a time of secular crisis

Adolescence to rising adulthood:  Reacting against what they perceive as the isolationism, pathological individualism, and needless rebellion of their parents (mostly Reactives), they early see the importance of collective action, banding together in the face of the emerging external threat.  Moral debates begin to be seen as a luxury that a threatened society cannot afford, so there is increasing social consensus and a notion that social deviance (the hallmark of youthful Idealists) presents a social risk at a time when everyone has to "pull together".  Heroic, collaborative doers from youth on, Civics tend to make their best contributions early -- as when the previous Civic generation fought and won World War II.

Rising adulthood to midlife:  Civics carry their technocratic, rationalistic, outwardly focused, team-minded approach into their middle years, turning their energies to building a strong society.  Often they are unequalled at achieving the impossible -- conquering diseases, putting a man on the moon -- especially if technological solutions are tenable.  Since moral and spiritual crises do not seem central (such issues were "resolved once for all" by the handling of the previous secular crisis, often viewed as a "war to end all wars" or some such), it is presumed that a society of purely rational persons will naturally behave in a civil, ethical fashion.

Midlife to elderhood:  Aging Civics probably view with dismay the "inexplicable" moral rebellion of the young Idealists who are beginning to dominate the youth culture.  Fear that all that they have built will be "swept away" in the coming spiritual awakening, they may retrench, or attempt to build an outer legacy that will survive their passing.  Usually they are willing to leave the philosophical questions to a younger generation as long as they feel that the external (economic or technocratic) contributions they have made remain secure or in their hands.

Adaptive generations (e.g., born 1927-1942;  or, the new crop of babies to be born in 2003 and following) -- come of age in the aftermath of a secular crisis (outer-driven era)

Adolescence to rising adulthood:  Reacting against what they perceive as having been born "too late" to do any great things as their parents (mostly Civics) did, Adaptives tend not to rebel outwardly -- for one thing, they have it too good, having been significantly overprotected as children.  Instead, they attempt to consolidate the gains their Civic elders won for them through their "blood, sweat, and tears" by means of political and legislative activities -- consistent with their core motive of egalitarian compromise.  Often young Adaptives are highly politically motivated -- but desire to work within the system, not to work outside it (or rebuild it along different lines) as young Idealists might.  

Rising adulthood to midlife:  As consummate negotiators, mediators, and legislative systematizers, Adaptive adults may have a nagging sense that their contributions are "insignificant" next to the "world-saving sacrifices" of their Civic elders, however, and probably underestimate the worth of their quieter contributions by a notable margin.  They bring a sense of civility to the political process that is rare in any other generation.  "Politics is the art of the possible" is a common Adaptive sentiment, and tends to be quite opaque to other generations.  (Idealists, for instance, would much rather hold stubbornly to an unattainable ideal or a philosophic absolute, whether or not it is politically feasible.  Interestingly, the word "compromise" has positive connotations for the average Adaptive -- it means civility, reasonableness, tolerance -- and negative connotations for the average Idealist, for whom it suggests a failure to hold to core principles, a lack of conviction and commitment, and perhaps even hypocrisy or insincerity.)  As the "Man In The Grey Flannel Suit" generation, they are skilled at working within established social structures, less motivated either to construct them (as Civics do), critique or possibly destroy them (as Idealists do), or ignore them as irrelevant (as Reactives do).

Midlife to elderhood:  Just as Reactives are most at risk of "aging badly", so Adaptives tend to age well, even though they tend to be underrated as social leaders and may be at their best in behind-the-scenes, second-in-command roles.  (Note that no U.S. President was elected from the most recent Adaptive generation -- we went right from the last Civic president, George Bush Sr., to the first Idealist president, Bill Clinton -- but the most effective advisors and cabinet members of the past 20 to 30 years have all been Adaptives.)  They may view the radical transformism of the upcoming Idealists with some alarm, but are as likely to treat it with a degree of bemused detachment, believing that good will, tolerance, civility, and the art of compromise will ultimately prevail.  Often they are right, though sometimes (as in the aftermath of the Civil War) they are desperately and tragically wrong.

Note how difficult it is for any generation to view their next-elders objectively and compassionately!  As I write, my own narratives above are doubtless colored by my own experience as a middle-stage Idealist, for whom the Idealist life cycle seems natural and normal, but for whom the previous (Adaptive) and following (Reactive) cycles seem particularly opaque, strange, even abhorrent.  (With age has come some degree of wisdom, however, and I can now -- as I did not 20 years ago -- see the inherent value in these styles of life, as important to the overall balance of cultural history as is my own.)  What each generation most prizes, the following generation may tend (especially in the years of adolescent rebellion) to despise or disparage.  Thus each phase in history is characterized by the neglect of one important set of values, those captured by the cohort that is either too young or too old to effectively advocate it.  As I write, the inherent civility, tolerance, and ability to compromise that are the strengths of the aging Adaptive generation (youngest Adaptive elder is now 60, oldest is 75) are beginning to pass from the scene.  Look for an increasing polarization, if not balkanization, of our culture as a result.  This is why society is best served if the pending secular crisis does not come too soon;  if it comes before midlife Idealists have been sufficiently mellowed by experience and the wisdom of age, it can be apocalyptic in tone and scope, as was the Civil War.  If this happens in our more technologically advanced day, it could mean World War III -- but I'm hoping that Osama bin Laden holds off long enough that this won't be the case.  Secular crises that come when Idealists are old enough to be elder statespersons, not midlife firebrands, usually turn out much better.

More later!

Back to Home Page