I am glad to see that William Strauss and Neil Howe have an article about generations in the current Harvard Business Review. I’ve always felt their book, Generations, was the best on this topic—but it was also quite “old” (published in 1991). They hadn’t even named Generation X yet! They called it the “Thirteenth Generation” (so don’t worry, Lisa, their moniker of “Homelander” probably won’t stick. As smart as these guys are, they don’t seem to be very good at picking names).

Their book is quite long, so if you want the short version of their take on generations, the HBR article is a good place to start. You have to be a subscriber (and log in) to read the full article, but here’s a link. (Their analysis, by the way, is the foundation of the summary of the generations that I present in my e-book, by the way).

One piece that I’m glad they included in the article is their notion that generations in this country develop cyclically, taking on one of four generational types. They argue that generations emerge because of significant “social moments” in history, and that these major moments happen on a frequency that produces these four generational types. Those emerging during a major moment (either “civic crisis” or “spiritual awakening”) are dominant generations, and those following them are recessive. In the book, they called the four types Idealist, Reactive, Civic, and Adaptive. To give you a frame of reference, the Boomers are Idealist, Generation X is Reactive, and Millennials are Civic.

In the HBR article, though, they have changed the names. The four archetypes are now called Prophet, Nomad, Hero, and Artist (don’t those sound a little better than the original four?). The article then goes on to explain how each generation will change as it moves into its next life stage over the next twenty years. For example, they characterize Gen X’s youth as “abandoned” and young adulthood as “alienated” (sounds good, so far), and they suggest that our midlife will be “pragmatic.” It’s an interesting read.