Generational Research and Advertising to Millennials

Recently, in doing some media around Super Bowl advertising, a newspaper reporter asked me about the types of advertising that tend to resonate with millennials. Therefore, I did the usual searches of academic databases, and was surprised how few studies focus directly on this topic. While there are a limited number of good studies addressing advertising to millennials (e.g., Smith 2010; Tanyel, Stuart and Griffin; Chang and Tung 2016; Knoll, et al., 2017), most of these deal with specialized issues. So I ended up drawing more on material produced in the popular press or on the websites of media research companies (e.g., Nielsen, Ace Metrix) to find insights relevant to advertisers. As millennials have become the largest age cohort in the world, with a population of more than 75 million in the U.S. alone, eclipsing even the baby boomers (Pankoke 2016), it is an important group to study.

I will share some short observations on how to appeal to millennials later in this editorial, but as Editor-in-Chief of the International Journal of Advertising, I would first like to make a call for more research on how various generations react to advertising. To this end, I have two complaints about the state of current research, one that goes well beyond the advertising/marketing communications realm and the other that is a direct comment on the state of research in the field.

A first issue I have with research on millennials is a pet peeve of mine that dates back many years. This complaint is that the generations we refer to when we conduct academic studies are poorly defined and somewhat nebulous. Since definitions of what constitutes a “generation” have generally originated from popular books (e.g. Strauss and Howe 2000) rather than sophisticated academic studies, we end up with ill-defined groups. Indeed, there is considerable heterogeneity in experience, motivation, lifestyle, values and consumer behavior with these wide generational cohorts. For example, having been born in 1961, by most definitions I am a “baby boomer.” The idea behind the “baby boom” in the U.S. was that there was a larger population cohort created because of U.S. service members returning from World War II and starting families. This concept is difficult to for me to relate to as my father was born in 1937, making him 8 years old at the end of the war, hardly in his prime reproductive years!

As generations seem to be aggregated in 20-year increments, I know that I am not the only one that has a difficult time relating to a generational “label.” Those born in the same timeframe as I was mostly feel pretty far removed from the stereotypical “peace, love, nuts and berries” hippie image of the 1960s counterculture. While I certainly like the music from that decade, my formative years were in the 1970s and, not surprisingly, seventies pop culture is what I relate to the most. Surely many people from other generations face similar ambivalence.

In looking at various definitions of Millennials, it is not even entirely clear as to precisely who qualifies. Definitions vary from starting anywhere from 1980 to mid-1980s and lasting through anywhere from the mid-1990s to the year 2000 or so. Thus, the main point here is that the cohorts should be clearly defined. Going forward, the ideal would be define age cohorts based on analysis showing that as a market segment, the age cohort really is homogenous enough to target. While this may be difficult to address within the advertising community, it might be worth a try! At a minimum, a justification for the birth years chosen in defining a generation is needed when conducting generational advertising research.

This definitional issue leads into my 2nd point, which is that because that because of the wide range of years within a generational cohort is that the heterogeneity within these groups creates analytical problems. Within group differences should be acknowledged and analyzed in advertising research on millennials or other generations. When I think back to 20 years ago, I was a young Assistant Professor at Villanova University who was working on a clunky desktop computer while saving things on a floppy disk and going to online resources likes Gopher and Yahoo groups as “surfing the web” was not possible yet. Especially in recent decades, technology and some aspects of lifestyles change quickly. As a result, when directly studying millennials in particular, advertising researchers should consider differences within the group. For example, it makes a great deal of sense to look for differences between “early millennials” and “late millennials” in a research study.

So what insights for creating effective Super Bowl ads did my review of the literature produce? In terms of approaches that may stand out from the crowd, the following generalizations appear to apply, and it would be interesting to see them verified (or refuted) by academic research:

1)	Ads with artsy creative and high visual impact often score with millennials. Ace Metrix's studies of a large sample of ads document that millennials are more impressed by stunning visuals and “highbrow” artistic advertising than other groups (Ace Metrix 2014). Thus, very high quality creative with movie quality visuals is often a good start in scoring with the group via television advertising
2)	Corporate social responsibility can be highly effective. While millennials are often portrayed as more conforming that other generations, they are committed to societal and public welfare issues (Nielsen 2017). Brands that spotlight a CSR initiative or an uncontroversial social cause are often rewarded, even if there is not a direct link to the product. It is more of a matter of the perception that the company cares about societal wellbeing issues.
3)	Capitalizing on the nature of the relationship millennials have with brands. While often stereotyped as being less brand loyal, millennials can actually show intense loyalty that help them build their own personal brand. Hoffman (2014) cites a study by agency Moosylvania that documents how millennials favor brands they view as part of their own identity. For example, if wearing a clothing brand helps reinforce the individual's image with friends or patronizing the brand shows support for charitable causes (e.g. TOMS shoes), brand resonance can result.
4)	Use quirky, offbeat humor. Studies by Ace Metrix have consistently found that ads “quirky” ads are well received by millennials in comparison to other groups. Humorous ads aimed at the lowest common denominator are more likely to flop with millennials, many of whom like to focus on self-improvement and educating themselves about products (Grace 2011).

In summary, we need more research on generational issues in advertising. Not surprisingly, conducting such research is a little messy in light of loose definitions of the generations and built in heterogeneity of wide age cohort. As a result, it would be very useful to see researchers: 1) clearly define the generational group they are focusing on clearly, using the most appropriate definition they can find; and 2) do analyses that examine the degree of within-group differences in addition at looking at differences between groups.