Everyone has their opinions about Generation Z. Most aren’t flattering. Social commentators and workplace managers alike bemoan Gen Z’s lack of soft-skills, work-ethic, and ability to cope with “real life.”
As a millennial, I'm used to the panicky outrage-mongering of intergenerational warfare. It’s an ancient phenomenon — even the Roman poet Horace bemoaned
“Our sires' age was worse than our grandsires'. We their sons are more worthless than they: so in our turn we shall give the world a progeny yet more corrupt.”
However, there’s more here than typical intergenerational squabbling. Gen Z has faced major, unprecedented challenges that disrupted their developmental opportunities.
Yes, every generation faces challenges—challenges don’t excuse anyone from pursuing growth. However, Gen Z’s struggles aren’t character flaws, but the products of an environment that was, at least in part, shaped by those who came before them. So, if Gen Z appears unprepared for adulthood and the “real world,” it’s ultimately because no one took responsibility for preparing them — especially in Higher Ed.
The Need for Developmental Education
Not so long ago, Higher Ed was where students learned not just information, but how to critically think, to explore who they wanted to become, and how to make a difference in society. However, Higher Ed has steadily drifted away from that vision[RB1] , and Gen Z is paying the price (5).
When it comes to information transfer, Higher Ed can’t compete with the internet. However, while the internet contains almost infinite information, that information lacks context. YouTube, Github, and Wikipedia can’t teach you how to think, nor will they form identity in a community of learning. Simply put, the internet cannot compete with higher ed when it comes to providing the developmental context necessary for building soft skills—including those Gen Z is accused of lacking.
Soft skills aren’t about what you know and thus can’t be taught like algebra or anatomy. Characteristics like resilience, work ethic, collaboration, and self-awareness are a matter of who you are, and so they must be developed through a process, not simply taught in a classroom (5, 7).
Gen Z knows this, and many report feeling undeveloped and unprepared for the real world, especially in Higher Ed (4). These are the outcomes that matter most for adulthood, responsible citizenship, and effective leadership—and they require a developmental approach (4). Ultimately, Higher Ed’s neglecting that approach is, at least in part, responsible for Gen Z’s gaps.
Real Challenges
Gen Z presents numerous unique challenges, especially for Leader Development.
First of all, yes, Gen Z has soft skill deficits, including communication, initiative-taking, and resilience (1). However, such deficits shouldn’t surprise anyone. These are socially developed abilities, and Gen Z’s socialization process was massively interrupted by the COVID pandemic (3). The “digital natives” of Gen Z came of age with most of their relationships involving screens. Paradoxically, this has made Gen Z both hyper-connected and socially underdeveloped, as their communication is filtered through algorithm-driven platforms designed for engagement, not meaningful connection or growth (6, 9).
At the same time, Gen Z’s ideas about leadership have been warped by over two decades of public leadership failures, from Silicon Valley fraudsters to performative political figures. Meanwhile, the rise of “influencers” has left Gen Z vulnerable to conflating charisma and ideological extremism with actual leadership, reducing their conceptualization to slogans, outrage, and “vibes,” not meaningful accomplishments. Disillusioned by hypocrisy, corruption, and abuse, some in Gen Z now reject the notion of leadership (and leader development) entirely. Some even see work itself as meaningless, and consequently no longer aspire to leadership or professional development (6,8, 9).
Deeper Strengths
Despite the hubbub around Gen Z’s challenges, Gen Z’s numerous advantages for leader development often go unnoticed.
First, the youthfulness of Gen Z is itself a developmental advantage! Most are still forming their identities, and that malleability, while posing risks (e.g. for misinformation or radicalization), also leaves them primed for development.
At the Doerr Institute, our longest-running program is Activation, a semester of one-on-one, executive-style coaching. In corporate settings, coach certifications and experience levels are incredibly important. A CEO making decisions impacting hundreds of employees and billions of dollars presents a challenge that might overwhelm a newly minted coach.
However, the challenges faced by most Gen Z college students aren’t particularly complex or difficult — even when deeply personal and significant to the students themselves. That doesn’t mean these challenges aren’t worth taking seriously; it just means that they don’t require elite coaching credentials.
The data support this conclusion. At the Doerr Institute, we recently analyzed our students’ development, and our data showed that levels of coaches’ certifications made no difference in the impact of coaching on students. Gen Z are so inherently developable that what matters most is intentional, consistent developmental effort — the kind that research [RB2] has shown to be lacking across Higher Ed (4,5).
Gen Z’s “digital native” status likewise presents its own advantages.
During the pandemic, we compared developmental outcomes between students who had been coached in-person and those coached remotely over Zoom. What we found — and have continued to find — is that the coaching process matters more than the coaching medium, with no meaningful differences between online and in-person developmental coaching. Put simply, Gen Z’s comfort with digital connection enhances its access to developmental efforts. (9)
Gen Z possesses numerous other strengths for leader development. They are value-driven and able to think systemically, often seeing the complexities in situations without compromising their own ethical standards (1). That can make them difficult to wrangle, but it can also be leveraged by leader development efforts to fuel their sense of purpose, resilience, and creativity (8).
Furthermore, Gen Z has grown up with concepts like emotional intelligence, inclusion, and psychological safety as a part of its cultural lexicon, setting the stage for buy-in with fundamental leader development principles (7). Gen Z is also fiercely independent and entrepreneurial, having come of age in a constantly changing technological landscape that produced a level of adaptability that many older generations simply don’t share (2).
Gen Z’s strengths leave them primed for development, but only if we stop pretending that growth happens passively, and instead create the intentional, focused efforts that meaningful development requires.
The Future: Collaborative Construction, not Apathetic Abandonment
Most colleges and universities claim to develop leaders, but few actually do. Leader development requires active intervention, not passive osmosis. Simply attending college doesn’t change students’ leader identities, and thus doesn’t develop them as leaders. It takes intentionally constructed and structured interventions to develop leaders.
Yes, those programs can be hard to create and administer. However, if you’re not doing that work, then you need to stop claiming to develop leaders — and you definitely need to stop complaining about Gen Z if you don’t want to be a part of the solution to their problems.
The future doesn’t require generational handwringing; it requires effort and intentionality. We must meet the members of Gen Z where they are, leveraging their strengths while addressing their deficits. We have to create spaces in Higher Ed where students can acknowledge their limitations while also understanding their unique developmental strengths and opportunities.
Above all, we must resist generational infighting. Gen Z is neither broken nor doomed — they’re just young. If we provide them intentional, evidence-based developmental programs, then they are sure to rise to meet tomorrow’s challenges.
However, we need to stop pretending that such development just happens, or that Gen Z can somehow “figure it out” themselves. Doing so isn’t just naive; it’s lazy. And we owe them more than that.
References and Further Reading
1. Bălan, S., & Vreja, L. O. (2018). Generation Z: Challenges for management and leadership. Proceedings of the 12th International Management Conference “Management Perspectives in the Digital Era”, Bucharest, Romania, 1–2.
2. Bateh, D. (2018). Leadership from millennials to generation Z transformed. Journal of Advanced Management Science, 6(4), 11–14. https://doi.org/10.18178/joams.7.1.11-14
3. Di Pietro, G. (2023). The impact of Covid-19 on student achievement: Evidence from a recent meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 39, 100530. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100530
4. Johnson, C. D., & Routon, P. W. (2024). Who feels taught to lead? Assessing collegiate leadership skill development. Journal of Leadership Education, 23(1), 50–65. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOLE-01-2024-0013
5. McCarron, G. P., McKenzie, B. L., & Yamanaka, A. (2023). Leadership identity development. New Directions for Student Leadership, 2023(178), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.20552
6. Vadvilavičius, T., & Stelmokienė, A. (2019). The consequences of “dark” leadership: Perspective of generation Z. Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 82(1), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1515/mosr-2019-0016
7. Weng, J., & Seemiller, C. (2024). Learning needs of the 21st century: Using intentional emergence with Generation Z college students. New Directions for Student Leadership, 2024(181), 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.20589
8. Yavuz Aksakal, N., & Ulucan, E. (2024). Revealing the Leadership Characteristics of the Modern Age: Generation-Z Perspective. International Journal of Organizational Leadership, 13(1), 22–38. https://doi.org/10.33844/ijol.2024.60397
9. Yılmaz, B., Dinler Kısaçtutan, E., & Gürün Karatepe, S. (2024). Digital natives of the labor market: Generation Z as future leaders and their perspectives on leadership. Frontiers in Psychology, 15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1378982