IT'S ABOUT TIME.

A few weeks ago, ad agency JWT announced its first-ever report on Female Tribes.

[Do ignore the fact that the agency’s former chair might be facing a lawsuit re alleged sexist and racist remarks.]

Though the news release and subsequent coverage were sketchy (we suspect the details are being saved for current and prospective clients), it supposedly looks at the rise of “female capital” and the value women bring as leaders, wealth creators, and artists.  Twenty different tribes, from cultural icons and Asian alphas to teen activists, were identified from a base of 4,300 female respondents in nine countries (ages range from 18 to 70).

Three “arghhs” come from us: 

First, because this kind of survey – regardless of depth and breadth – appears to be a sort of typology foisted on top of what we as women know are our differences and commonalities.  After all, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to pick out Beyoncé as a cultural icon and Malala Yousafzai as a teen activist (among other tribes). 

Second, the use of the phrase “female capital.”  It reminds us of time spent in professional services firms where they categorized work in HR and talent as human capital.  A phrase that’s not really descriptive and definitely dehumanizing.

And third, the sad fact that, to our knowledge, this is the first attempt to figure out the world of women from a perspective that doesn’t involve why we buy. 

Anyone ask Gloria Steinem?

THE MICRO-, MINI-, MACRO, AND MEGA VERSIONS OF US

A long time ago, in marketing lands far away (nearby too), we took great delight in classifying our customers, past, present, and future, by groups.  That effort, a/k/a segmentation, could take any number of forms – demographic, geo-demographic, behavioral, lifetime value, occasional, or by the products developed by research firms. 

For a while, that type of identification worked fairly well, leading those of us who specialize in change and behavioral matters to adopt those methods for our messages.  Our thinking:  If we could segment into measurable subsets of colleagues who were a) easy to reach and b) would respond consistently to our messaging, we could ensure awareness, at least, if not action.  [Of course, the premise worked best if your colleagues numbered in the thousands.]  With social media, listservs morphed into social communities, formed on dozens of specifications.  Ergo, those employees fascinated by CSR would rsvp to specific community activities, whereas those intent on becoming cross-functional team “volunteers” to study/solve a business problem would raise their hands.

It don’t work so good these days.  First, many fit into a variety of groups:  Like a hyper-involved philanthropist (a single dad) who also leads an R&D team and travels like a banshee.  Or a work-life balance advocate who works virtually as a sales professional, yet wants to contribute her two-cents’ worth to corporate affinity groups.  Even a marketing assistant (and women’s rights fan) who helps with team-building and conferences, yet has a passion for values-driven causes.

Second is the question:  What am I missing if I sign up for X but not Y?  There’s an innate something in us curious beings that always wonders if we might miss a community notice for, say, Habitat for Humanity volunteers – if we’re not in that forum.  Those working on a business metrics project might lose out when, for instance, an accounting forum mentions some of the latest and greatest.

Finally, consider today’s commandment to change and reinvent ourselves – continually, inside and outside the corporation.  We won’t always be categorized as a procurement analyst.  As an MBA-LLD in the pharma world.  As a sustainability guru in animal health and welfare.  What happens, then, to the already classified mega- and mini-mes? 

COMM-CENSUS

Waahh!

The cries you hear are coming from the Midwest, which, says the U.S. Census, is no longer the heartland.  Instead, metro areas increased by nearly 11 percent over the last 10 to 12 years, as did western and southern regions.

Some other numbers that count:

• Latinos, along with a more concentrated Asian upswing, lead the people growth surge by major margins – like 65 percent in Texas, 55 percent in Florida, and, yes, nearly half the increase in Arizona and Nevada.  [That’s not so good for the GOP.]

• City hoods have become more integrated, with the most prominent example being Atlanta.  [That’s great news for promoting the U.S. of A. as a true melting pot.]

Other drool-worthy stats for demographers and psychographers range from Detroit’s “credit negative” status (a 25 percent decline) to the year 2041, the so-called date for the “majority minority” switch in this country.  [Translation:  At that time, whites of European ancestry will make up less than 50 percent of the population.]

We could spend even more time pondering the population shifts and transitions.  What becomes crystal clear to us, in our professional roles as chief communicators and change mavens, are the implications to our work (not to mention the companies we work for). 

A few of our top-of-mind thoughts: 

• Families and personal life take center stage, with policies and advertising and communications reflecting that focus.

• Diversity gets real.   Nope, not a simple nod to mixing color and gender.  Rather, language and visuals and behaviors become keenly attuned to everyone’s needs and inclinations. 

• Words and pictures matter.  Partnering with human resources experts, draw up different kinds of guides that segment and introduce messages and design and translations that will resonate with the various employee populations. 

• Internal and social-media communities will form naturally, gravitating towards like-minded colleagues who share specific values, yet welcoming other more diverse individuals and teams.

Is this a vision, an evolution, or a brand-new world?