For years, generation Z has been presented as a homogeneous block: diverse, compromised, digital and with a new approach to life, work and consumption. But that unit has begun to crack. According to the report “The Great Gen Z divides”, prepared by Edelman, the cohort born approximately between 1995 and 2012 is today crossed by an internal fracture that completely redefines how their members relate to each other, and also with brands, institutions and culture.

Edelman proposes to talk about two generations within one: GEN Z 1.0, which includes those who are now 23 and 29 years old, and GEN Z 2.0, formed by the youngest of the group, between 13 and 22 years. If the former were socialized in an environment where activism and confidence in the brands were booming, the latter have grown in a saturated informative landscape, dominated by the Tiktok algorithm and marked by a pandemic that altered its formative years. The result is a radical divergence in values, perceptions and ways of interacting with the environment.

Thus, GEN Z 1.0 tends to be more participatory and community. Believe in the power of brands to transform realities and get involved in social causes. Its trust is granted by default and is lost if it is betrayed. The gene z 2.0, on the other hand, moves with distrust by default: it questions everything before granting its trust, prioritizes humor, irony and meme aesthetics, and even distrusts the algorithms themselves that serve as a cultural compass.

This generational difference is not only conceptual, but quantifiable. For example, in the United States, the younger Zs have a growing inclination towards conservative positions, in contrast to the progressive line of the elderly. Gender gaps are also appreciated: among young men, support for feminism is 21 percentage points lower than their female peers. And as for its information and entertainment referents, 72% of the Z 2.0 gene uses artificial intelligence at least once a week, and is allowed to be molded by platforms where cultural codes change in a matter of minutes.

Despite these internal differences, generation Z is still the most influential of its time, and brands that aspire to connect with it must understand the complexity of their multiple voices. It is no longer enough to speak on behalf of “the gen z”. It is necessary to refine the speech, attend to nuances and, above all, to show tangible actions that generate trust.

The report data reveal that 65% of the Z trust the brands they use, compared to 56% who trust the media or 55% who trust companies in general. That trust is gained with quality, reputation, closeness and, especially, utility. 72% expect brands to help them “feel good”; 66% want them to give them tools to do good; and 58% especially value that they offer them a sense of community.

To respond to these expectations, brands must abandon unidirectional models and adopt an attitude of active listening, with proposals that reflect the Z culture instead of trying to impose a new one. Facilitate face -to -face experiences to flee from digital overexposure, support relevant causes from everyday life and create native content in ecosystems where this generation already interacts are some of the keys that the report points out.

“Every day I see how this generation challenges simplistic labels. It is no longer worth talking about singular gen z: we have to understand their internal fractures to be able to really connect. The brands that are brave and achieve it will be those that will be able to build lasting relationships in a context of generalized distrust”says María José Cerqueiro, Gen Z Lab Ambassador in Edelman Spain.

The fragmentation of generation Z implies, therefore, plurality. And understanding their own internal tensions is key to all brands that want to be relevant in the new cultural and economic cycle that this generation is marking.

More info.: The Great Gen Z Divide