“Hey, I’m told I am a ‘Snowflake.’ What’s your label?”
“Oh, I am an ‘Iceberg,’ thanks for asking. Nice to meet you!”
In theory, most of us agree that stereotyping undermines trust and respect in the workplace, contradicts social ideals, dehumanizes individuals, manifests bias, and often leads to lost opportunities and connections. We can’t know and adapt to an individual we perceive through the lens of a label.
We have worked hard to dismantle stereotypes around race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation. Yet, stereotyping someone based on their generation remains highly prevalent in and outside the workplace.
It is a bad habit—one that reveals more about those promulgating the stereotype than it does about those being typecast.
The practice is particularly visible today in how managers (Generation X, born between 1965 and 1997 and older) view and treat individuals from Generation Z (born after 1997).
GenXers, like the authors, were encouraged to keep feelings and opinions under the waterline. Above the surface, they were taught to present themselves as hyper-capable and in control of their own destinies. As a result, GenXer “Icebergs” may be less willing or less equipped to address negative emotions or mental health challenges (perhaps due to an aversion to feelings of vulnerability or not wanting to be inappropriate). In difficult times, they are more likely to melt down or shut down instead.
In contrast, GenZers—sometimes described as “Snowflakes”—set boundaries on their time, energy, and spirit, often leading to stereotypes of entitlement and poor motivation. They are also open to discussing feelings, personal challenges, and aspirations, which opens them up to being labeled as overly emotional, and perceived as unable to engage with opposing opinions nor accept criticism with grace.
Complaints and oversimplifications are not neutral—they come from an internal place of discomfort. GenXers may feel disheartened by a rapidly changing world and even jealous of the accommodations that are being provided around workplace flexibility. They might also be fearful of GenZers who are equipped with advanced digital skills, a penchant for driving social change, and strong opinions.
Interestingly, Icebergs criticize Snowflakes for the things the former were denied or denied themselves, such as work-life balance, expressing preferences, admitting and addressing mental health conditions, or acknowledging and combatting the negative impact of growth at all costs—be it economic or professional.
So we ask, what do our generational complaints reflect about what is happening in our own professional life? What are the implications for us and our workplaces?
Stereotypes serve and please us
This confrontation between older generations and GenZ is not driven uniquely by fear or differences in emotional regulation: stereotypes serve a biological purpose by conserving energy. Every human being lives with a “body budget,” according to Lisa Feldman Barrett, a renowned neuroscientist, and author of How Emotions Are Made. This budget is relatively fixed, although eating and sleeping well can expand it. Simplifying information and forming judgments is a strength of human cognition. Daniel Kahneman, a Nobel Prize-winning author, called this “the law of least effort.”
So, in at least one sense, stereotyping is an evolutionary adaptation to energy management. But in the modern era, where energy conservation is less of a concern, stereotyping becomes less useful and leads to long-term sub-optimal outcomes in business and across society.
But stereotyping is not just about efficiency—it is also about the emotional games we play to deal with inferiority, loneliness, and accountability. Persistent complaining can allow us to feel superior to those we complain about (fluffing our egos because we could, of course, do things so much better). A related payoff is an affiliation (providing connection and status, which can lead to a tribalistic “us” vs. “them” dynamic and a notion that the “other” would be so much better if only they listened to “us”). Finally, accusing others of not doing their part or undermining our authority enables us to place responsibility for negative outcomes on others instead of engaging in self-reflection.
The cost of acting fast, not thinking at all
When stereotypes are propagated repeatedly, everyone pays: parties disengage immediately, and generally, the damage done is hard to reverse. When others complain about us as a class without knowing us as person, it can hurt our feelings, damage our reputations, or lead us to accept lower expectations of ourselves—fulfilling the stereotype prophecy.
These blind spots are costly for GenZers at a formative point in their careers. Being judged by generalities rather than for who they are is demoralizing—it is particularly damaging because they are seeking a form of belonging and purpose at work that may be lacking in their lives. This passion can rapidly turn to pathos.
In April 2023, ResumeBuilder.com surveyed 1,344 managers and business leaders and found that 74% believe GenZ is more challenging to work with than other generations (they will account for nearly a quarter of the US workforce by 2025). Even worse, 60% of managers consider GenZers “generally unprepared for the workplace.” Another of their surveys in 2024 showed that 31% of 715 hiring managers surveyed preferred hiring older workers.
For organizations and colleagues, not integrating them properly means missing out on GenZers’ distinctive attributes: early-career over-index in creativity, risk-taking, and a willingness to challenge conventional wisdom. These are all invaluable qualities that create real value for companies competing in the contemporary marketplace. For the first time, 60% of 18 year olds checked the “two or more races” box on the 2020 US Census.
In addition, GenZers were raised in a digital world and were immersed from a very young age in many social and economic changes. GenZers’ commitment to social causes balances concern for profit with solving some of the most intractable challenges of our times. Their unique and essential perspective can fuel business innovation, adaptability, and longevity. Moreover, GenZers access to global knowledge and digital literacy are important assets in a rapidly changing and technologically accelerating world
Considering instead the differences within
Is the GenZ persona a viable indicator of who an individual is and how they should be treated?
This is a testable hypothesis.
Hogan, a leading personality assessment company, asked more than 1.5 million volunteer assessment takers from 2001 to 2018—aged 18 to 75, 65% male—questions related to interpersonal skills, behavior under stress, motivations, values, and preferences. Hogan tested three factors that potentially impacted the assessment responses: age, generation, and the year of the assessment.
Hogan’s analysis resoundingly rejects the hypothesis that knowing generational cohort membership is of any real value. According to the study, birth cohort or generation effects explain 1–2% of response variation, age effects explain 5–10%, and time-period effects explain 2–5%.
Bottom line: Individual effects explain the vast majority of variability in the assessment scores. Using general generational cohort information, therefore, offers negligible information for determining core values, motivations, interests, and relational traits. Using statistical terms, anchoring perceptions, and treating GenZers as stereotypes rather than as individuals results in a Type 2 error: accepting the hypothesis when it is not true.
This does not mean that we deny that members of various generations grew up in different historical, social, and technological times. As a result, each generation gravitates around norms, goals, accepted ways to interact and show respect, and attitudes toward privacy and authority.
These factors will impact what each generation considers to be stressors and expectations, which managers should consider to enhance well-being and maximize contribution (especially regarding communication, expectations, approach to mental health, and feedback).
A thaw and a challenge
While “Icebergs” and “Snowflakes” may present as distinct in preferences, style, or attention span, all members of all generations share a common humanity and all are uniquely different. Diversity works when these individuals can express their thoughts, feelings, and the full spectrum of their personality and creativity—and managers must make a conscious effort to cultivate such environments.
Respecting differences and focusing on strengths—practicing a form of “appreciative inquiry”—leads to better outcomes on individual and organizational levels. It entails taking a step back and viewing any provoking event objectively: suspending stereotypes and seeing the “whole person” both in the context of their age, but also everything we know (or could learn post-event with a little effort) about a person—and about ourselves.
So next time you catch yourself relying on stereotypes or labels when interacting with colleagues from different generations, just take a moment to reflect on what these emotions and complaints might instead reveal about you and your body budget, your expectations at work and beyond, your fears and inferiorities, and your willingness to take responsibility. By taking this inventory, you can transform moments of misunderstanding into opportunities for connection and growth.
A version of this story was published on Medium and can be read in full here.
Carin-Isabel Knoop is the executive director of the Harvard Business School and author of Compassionate Management of Mental Health in the Modern Workplace.
David Ehrenthal is an executive leadership coach.