People who have witnessed or taken part in the same moment of recent history, especially those who are close in proximity, tend to judge it in similar ways. As a result, they share their distinctive notions and beliefs. At the same time, the set of values can shift when age gaps stretch across decades. Then conversations turn to generations; today there are three—traditional, X; millennials, Y; and the younger Z. That’s the premise.
We live in an era where reevaluating the relevance of Western theories imported over the last thirty years is both important and timely. So, how international are Strauss and Howe’s ideas? Do they apply to Russian realities? And if so, what values do the three generations among Russians embody?
These questions are explored by a study from the Russian State Social University. The Anthology of Social Situations: The ABCs of Generations X, Y, Z is the first nationwide work rooted in a geosocial approach. It examines how people behave in different life contexts across various areas of daily life.
Sixty regions were identified, covering 95 percent of everyday activities. To illustrate the breadth, the selected contexts include public transport, notary offices, social venues, and funeral homes. In each region, experts created at least 12 typical situations, with responses from generations X, Y, and Z assessed separately and compared. In total, more than 4,000 individuals living in Moscow and the Moscow region participated in the study. Its comprehensiveness is unique: there are no direct analogues in Russia or abroad in terms of interview scope, question range, and the computational model used to analyze answers.
What conclusions did the RSSU researchers reach?
The primary conclusion is the quantitative validation of the generational theory for Russian society. Distinct generational boundaries were established: generation X includes those born between 1960 and 1981, generation Y encompasses births from 1982 to 1996, and generation Z covers 1997 to 2006.
Because the study focused on a metropolitan population, there is a hypothesis that rural and small-town generational identities may differ slightly and require further verification.
Put simply, generation X tends to be more systematic than generation Y, while generation Z shows a higher degree of self-confidence. Older generations often aim to shape their surroundings, whereas generation Z leans toward individualism and self-assurance.
Millennials, whose formative years spanned the late 1990s to the early 2000s, prove the most challenging to describe. Russian millennials do not cling to their parents’ preference for consistency, yet they do not become loud champions of individuality either.
In terms of economic self-determination, generations Y and Z show greater willingness than their predecessors to assert their rights, suggesting a self-confidence approach with less acceptance of traditional tasks. The data reveal that today’s youth often lack patriarchal attitudes and plan their futures more clearly.
Reactions across the three generations are most similar in leisure, sports, and related activities. For example, while the social atmosphere matters to Generation X, younger groups focus more on service, music, and comfort levels.
Yet heartening convergence appears in areas tied to everyday life and work, including places of residence, professional engagement, and social activities. This pattern indicates a shared desire for security and a sense of collective safety. For all groups, family or the work team often takes precedence over friend circles related to a specific leisure venue. Even among younger participants, family interests frequently outrank those of friends.
Overall, the generational differences are not as pronounced as at the study’s outset. Representations of generations X, Y, and Z appear to form a cohesive group, without sharp divides. This supports the idea that core semantic orientations of Russian civilization persist and are transmitted across generations with visible, albeit evolving, continuity.
That does not mean there are no differences. The study identifies regions that warrant deeper exploration of behavioral determinants, employing clustering and frequency analyses that deepen understanding and point toward ongoing study.
Beyond its theoretical value, the research offers practical insights for entrepreneurs and marketers, presenting a broader, measured view of intergenerational choices across life domains. In contexts such as import substitution, trade, entrepreneurship, and industry, the findings provide fresh information for decision-makers.
Generational research at RSSU is set to continue. The next phase prioritizes studies of behavior in relation to social time, focusing on how people spend substantial portions of their day online, up to six hours for many in modern Russia.
A second strand in the Generations Anthology project will examine situations that highlight individual personality traits, acknowledging that conflicts can be both constructive and destructive.
Finally, future work aims to compare generations and their differences from a regional perspective. Researchers recognize variations between places like Arkhangelsk and Krasnodar and plan to quantify these distinctions, while testing the hypothesis that regional differences may be more impactful than generational ones.
Three active generations exist and they are distinct, yet they share a common thread. This unity supports a future where diversity strengthens the whole. People, after all, are different, and that diversity is a source of strength.
—