Roger Kellerman：会展业应摒弃无科学依据的代际标签，转向需求导向的参会者细分
The Generational Myth
Roger Kellerman撰文指出，会展行业普遍采用的代际行为假设（如针对千禧一代或Z世代设计会议）缺乏坚实的科学基础，属于叙事工具而非有效分析框架。研究表明年龄、时期与队列效应难以区分，且同一代人内部的差异远大于代际间差异，环境意识等偏好更多受收入、生活阶段及基础设施影响而非出生年份。作者呼吁主办方放弃基于年龄的刻板印象，转而利用真实数据建立以使用场景和核心动机为导向的需求型细分体系。
指出会展业长期依赖的代际划分缺乏科学依据，建议转向基于需求与情境的参会者细分策略。
For decades, the business events industry has embraced an enticing narrative: that every generation has distinct, predictable behaviours that should guide how we design conferences. Formats are redesigned for millennials, sustainability messaging is tailored to the expectations of generation Z, and digital strategies are based on the assumption that every newer generation is tech-savvy. The problem is that the scientific basis for all these claims and assumptions is remarkably weak.
Generational theory assumes that people born during the same period share characteristics shaped by common experiences. Decades of social science research have failed to confirm this. Three methodological problems remain: age, period, and cohort effects are almost impossible to distinguish; variation within a generation far exceeds variation between generations; and cohort boundaries are largely arbitrary.
Occupational and organisational psychologists find no credible evidence of meaningful generational differences in the workplace, and meta-analyses show that most presumed differences disappear when controlling for methodological biases. Generational categories are simply narrative devices, not scientific constructs.
The meetings industry is global, but generational labels are rooted in North American economic cycles, media and education. A 30-year-old in Sweden lives in a digitalised welfare state, a peer in Nairobi navigates a mobile-centred economy, and one in São Paulo faces political instability. Lumping them together by year of birth grossly oversimplifies reality. Apparent generational preferences often just reflect local infrastructure, education or market maturity.
Younger participants are widely assumed to be more environmentally conscious, shaping venue choices and messaging. But while they often do express stronger pro-environmental attitudes, their actual behavior doesn’t necessarily reflect this. Consumption appears to be driven primarily by income and life stage. Climate-conscious young people may still fly when they can afford to, while older Europeans on the other hand often behave more sustainably due to long-established habits of resource efficiency, regardless of environmental attitudes. And in emerging economies, local infrastructure and economic capacity dictate behaviour far more than age does. Ultimately, these are just matters of varying circumstances, rather than generational identity.
Whether networking, learning or closing deals, there are far better predictors than age, such as life stage, professional identity, cultural context, digital maturity or core motivation. A mid-career researcher from Boston may very well have more in common with a mid-career peer from Singapore than with a Boston colleague at a distinctly different point in their career – all regardless of age.
To be clear, abandoning generation-based thinking does not mean abandoning segmentation. Instead, organisers should shift from age-based participant profiles to needs-based segmentation – relying on real participant data rather than lazy assumptions about “digital natives,” designing experiences around use cases rather than age groups, and anchoring sustainability in measurable impact rather than presumed generational demands.
Age-based labels are just convenient oversimplifications. “Designing for Gen Z” sells better than “adapting to multifaceted, context-dependent needs.” Consultancy handbooks benefit from easy segmentation, no matter how arbitrary or artificial. Confirmation bias routinely turns anecdotes into perceived evidence, while triggering more clicks in the process.
The business events industry has enthusiastically embraced data analysis and impact measurement, yet it continues to rely on a core concept that science has thoroughly discredited. To foster meaningful exchange, it is time to view participants not as members of abstract generational cohorts, but as individuals shaped by context, experience and purpose. Generational labels are little more than false but softly comforting illusions of predictability.
来源：Meetings International · meetingsinternational.com