Excerpt: Most talent strategies plan Boomer-to-Gen-X transitions. The actual handoff? Jones-to-Millennial. The generational map is wrong. Every succession planning conversation in corporate America follows the same script: Boomers are retiring, Gen X is stepping up, Millennials are waiting in the wings. HR departments build talent pipelines around this transition. Consultants design leadership development programs for it. Boards approve succession frameworks based on it. There’s only one problem: the people actually making these decisions don’t fit the script. When Barack Obama said “I’m part of Generation Jones,” he was highlighting a generational identity that sits between the standard categories. The same flattening shows up in how we frame succession. Neither did Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, or Tim Cook fit neatly into the generational script that dominates succession narratives. Generation Jones: born between 1954 and 1964, now ages 62 to 72, disproportionately represented in CEO and board chair roles over much of the past decade. The term, coined by cultural commentator Jonathan Pontell, refers to a cohort that inherited the cultural promises made to early Boomers but entered adulthood in a more constrained economic era. Almost completely invisible in the generational workforce models guiding your talent strategy. This invisibility isn’t trivia. It’s a structural failure with consequences playing out in every organization right now. The Measurement Gap Open any generational workforce analysis. You’ll find: Baby Boomers (1946-1964), Generation X (1965-1980), Millennials (1981-1996). The framework looks comprehensive until you realize it groups a 62-year-old and an 80-year-old into the same category and calls them both “Boomers.” Someone born in 1948 came of age during actual prosperity. They got jobs, pensions, affordable housing, economic expansion. Someone born in 1960 absorbed those same promises during childhood, then entered adulthood during stagflation, oil crises, mass layoffs, and the systematic dismantling of lifetime employment. Shared label. Fundamentally different formative experiences. Most talent analytics either ignore Generation Jones entirely or bury them in the Boomer category where they don’t belong. When your generational framework erases the cohort running succession decisions, every strategy built on that framework inherits the error. And the error compounds. What Jones Leaders Learned and What They’re Bill Gates and Steve Jobs didn’t inherit positions of power. They came of age watching older Boomers control the technology and business landscape with no intention of making room. Both had to build parallel structures because existing ones wouldn’t let them in. Now their generation runs those structures. And many Jones leaders are doing to Millennials exactly what was done to them. Not the revolutionary part, the other part. Extending development timelines. Adding readiness requirements. Redefining what “prepared” means. Using succession planning to replicate the system that delayed them. Not out of malice. Because it’s the only model of leadership development they experienced as valid. The Readiness Paradox A 65-year-old executive looks at a 48-year-old successor and says “needs more development time.” HR assumes typical caution about experience. But that 65-year-old is Generation Jones. They didn’t reach their current role until 55 because older Boomers wouldn’t move. They’re not being careful. They’re unconsciously projecting a timeline that made sense for their journey onto someone facing entirely different conditions. Executive transition research from Spencer Stuart shows that through much of the 2010s and early 2020s, the average age of incoming CEOs hovered in the mid-50s, with a meaningful share appointed at 60 or older. In 2024, for example, the average incoming S&P 1500 CEO was 55.7, and nearly 30% were age 60 or above. The pattern reflected longer leadership runways and flatter hierarchies. They internalized that leadership requires extensive seasoning because their experience demanded it. Now they design development programs through that lens, artificially lengthening timelines for successors who don’t face the same structural barriers Jones faced. The successor sees arbitrary gatekeeping. The Jones leader sees appropriate rigor. Both are right about what they experienced. Neither can see the other’s reality because the organization’s generational framework doesn’t acknowledge Jones exists. Jones leaders came of age when institutions broke promises. Pensions disappeared. Layoffs hit. “Lifetime employment” ended while they were still being told it existed. This created a psychology that’s neither Boomer institutional trust nor Gen X self-reliance. It often produced a leadership style that prizes endurance over acceleration. The result: succession plans with sophisticated rhetoric about empowerment and development, minimal actual transfer of decision rights. Generation Jones learned you don’t get authority by being promised it. You get it by outlasting everyone else. They’re not withholding power because they’re Boomers clinging to relevance. They’re replicating the only pathway to power that ever worked for them. Most organizations think they’re planning Boomer-to-Gen-X successions. But in many cases, the handoff is from a Jones leader in their mid-60s to a Millennial in their mid-40s. Jones won’t retire on Boomer timelines because they never had Boomer careers. They define readiness through the conditions that shaped them. The Development Expectation Mismatch Generation Jones leaders often believe development should mirror their path: prove yourself in scarcity, wait your turn, earn trust slowly over decades. These aren’t preferences. They’re survival strategies that worked. They’re trying to develop Millennials and Gen Z who watched Generation Jones wait twenty years and concluded the system is broken. One generation learned patience and persistence eventually pay off. The next learned that the people preaching patience got stalled for two decades while preaching it. When a Jones leader says “this high-potential needs more runway,” and a Millennial successor hears “I’ll never actually hand this over,” both are speaking from lived experience. The organization can’t bridge the gap because its framework doesn’t acknowledge that Jones exists as a distinct cohort with distinct assumptions about how leadership development works. Why It’s Breaking Now Generation Jones isn’t historical context. They’re making succession decisions today. The oldest Gen Xers are 61. The youngest Millennials are 30. Recent Spencer Stuart data places the average S&P 500 CEO age near 59, with departing CEOs averaging in their early 60s. At the same time, incoming S&P 1500 CEOs in 2025 averaged 54.4 years old, and 84% were first-time CEOs — signaling accelerated turnover and younger appointments even as much of the past decade’s sitting leadership fell within Generation Jones. They’re not approaching these roles. They’re in them. And many got there much later than the frameworks predicted. Jeff Bezos: 62. Tim Cook: 65. A substantial portion of current Fortune 500 CEOs fall within Generation Jones. Having experienced delayed succession themselves, many now define what “ready” means, what development requires, and when authority transfers. This creates a bottleneck that looks like “Boomers won’t retire” but functions differently. Core Boomers who reached leadership at 45 and ran organizations for thirty years have a different relationship to stepping down than Jones leaders who got the same role at 55 and have been in power for fifteen. One group is extending a long run. The other finally got what they were promised and can’t imagine giving it up yet. Talent strategy built on the wrong generational map can’t solve for this. You can’t build pipelines when you’re planning for transitions that aren’t happening. You can’t close readiness gaps when “readiness” is being defined by a cohort whose experience your model doesn’t capture. Succession planning already struggles: studies consistently show that a majority of boards lack confidence in their CEO pipelines. Yet most frameworks focus on competency mapping and bench depth, not on the generational assumptions shaping how readiness is defined. We are measuring skills. We are not examining the lens of the measurer. The Invisible Replication Many succeeded anyway. They built new paths and eventually ran the structures that once excluded them. But the logic that helped them survive now shapes how they define readiness. Leadership, in their experience, required endurance. Authority was earned through delay. That conditioning doesn’t disappear once they reach the top. What feels like preparation to them can feel like repetition to the next generation. One cohort sees rigor. The other sees a stalled handoff. A succession framework that treats Jones as Boomer can’t show you that the 65-year-old defining “readiness” learned readiness meant waiting until 55. It can’t reveal that the timeline being imposed reflects one cohort’s formative experience rather than present organizational need. What Talent Leaders Miss Organizations debate whether Millennials are ready for leadership. Whether Gen X got skipped. Whether Boomers will ever retire. Those questions miss what’s actually happening. The real question: If your succession framework doesn’t account for the generation making succession decisions (their formative experiences, their relationship to institutional promises, their unconscious assumptions about development) how could it possibly work? Acknowledging them exposes how poorly talent planning models match reality. It’s easier to use Boomer-to-Gen-X frameworks than rebuild succession strategy around the cohort that’s been running everything for the past decade. But invisible doesn’t mean inconsequential. Generation Jones is defining readiness using assumptions formed in a very specific economic era. Your models don’t account for that. Your analytics don’t surface it. Your succession debates rarely name it. Some succession failures may reflect inherited definitions of preparation colliding with current conditions rather than capability gaps. When your framework cannot see the generation defining readiness, it cannot diagnose why readiness keeps feeling out of reach. Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt: “I was born in 1976, toward the end of the generation that includes individuals born between 1965 and 1980, though there’s widespread confusion about these parameters. The consensus, particularly among elder Gen X-ers — the cuspers of 1961 to 1964, who sometimes get grouped into the demographic called Generation Jones (as in “keeping up with the”) — is that the endpoints were mysteriously revised, but no one seems to know why or when or by whom. A 2020 Pew Research Center article notes that generations are “analytical constructs,” and explains that “it takes time for popular and expert consensus to develop as to the precise boundaries that demarcate one generation from another.” Online, where generational warfare is waged these days, many hold that the real Gen X range is 1961 to 1981 — beginning when fertility rates declined, soon after the Food and Drug Administration’s 1960 approval of the birth control pill. (The stakes of the argument are high: No one wants to be a millennial or a boomer.) Still, a 2017 Harvard University Joint Center for Housing Studies article placed Gen X at 1965 to 1984, recasting four years of millennials as Gen X-ers, in part because “using 20-year age spans for each generation” makes it “easier to compare them.” It also renders much generational theorizing meaningless.” Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt: “I graduated from high school in 1976, the year of the Bicentennial, in Haverford, Pa. Now, right on schedule, the members of my class find ourselves hurtling toward our 50th high school reunion in this, the year America turns 250. “Let Freedom Ring,” was one of the slogans back then. Another one, proposed by Richard Nixon in 1971, had been, “Open Borders, Open Hearts, Open Minds.”… The class of ’76 has found itself straddling a unique period in history, between the signposts of the Bicentennial, at one end of our lives, and this year’s Semiquincentennial, at the other. We set out in the age of Gerald Ford; we now reach our early dotage in the age of Trump. We began in an era before cell phones, before the internet, before Madonna; we arrive in 2026 in an era of AI, looksmaxxing, and self-driving cars. It is hard not to think that we enjoyed some of the best years of the country’s history, only to find ourselves now enduring some of its worst. A friend of mine took to social media to post a simple phrase on his birthday recently: “How terribly strange.” It was his 70th, of course. Members of my generation — so called “Generation Jones,” the trailing edge of the baby boom — didn’t need to be told that the line came from Simon and Garfunkel’s “Old Friends,” a song about the weirdness of old age, and the sweet melancholy of memory: “Time it was, and oh what a time it was, it was.” I remember the Bicentennial as a yearlong mashup of national pride, brazen commerciality, and weird semi-historical tours-de-force. As Jill Lepore recently reported in the New Yorker, “You could buy Old Glory Bicentennial condoms; Kotex Bicentennial sanitary supplies that promised both ‘200 Years of Freedom’ and ‘Personal Hygiene and Cleanliness;’ and two-ply Bicentennial toilet paper.” Something called the “Bicentennial Wagon Train” passed by my house in Devon on July 3, 1976; I’d handed a hoop-skirted girl from Alabama a giant inflatable package of Wrigley’s Spearmint gum as her prairie schooner rolled past. This had been a prop for a TV commercial of the time, whose tagline had been, “Carry the Big Fresh Flavor.” The Bicentennial wound up being a lot of fun, in spite of itself, and not least because the celebration itself was mostly driven by individual communities, rather than a single national entity. I remember sitting on a beach with friends in Stone Harbor, N.J., on the night of July 4, watching fireworks explode above the ocean. What a beautiful night, I thought. What a beautiful country… As for my brethren in the Bicentennial class of the Haverford School, gathered on May 1, to take the measure not only of the nation’s history, but of each other’s as well… I couldn’t wait to see the faces of my friends — along with, OK, a couple of nemeses — to see how they have been altered by time. There is something charming and mysterious about being able to see what became of the people you hung out with before you really even knew yourself — like being able to read the last chapter of a book you lost years ago, and thought you might never finish. I’m curious about what the next chapters of the country will bring, too.” Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt: “Meet Generation Jones: It concerns those born between 1954-1965 and constitutes a "microgeneration" with a distinct identity, values, and experiences. Generations , such as Baby Boomers, Generation X, Millennials , and Generation Z, are often used to describe people with shared experiences and characteristics and have become key elements of our social identity. Some sociologists point out, however, that among these large categories there are also the so-called "microgenerations", which do not fully identify with either of their two neighboring generations. One of these is Generation Jones, which includes those born approximately from 1954 to 1965. The term was introduced by author, television producer, and social commentator Jonathan Pondel to describe a group of people who grew up during the 1960s and 1970s but found themselves too young to participate in the major social and political movements of the era. According to Podell, Generation Jones developed a different worldview than the older Baby Boomers. They witnessed the changes brought about by the civil rights and peace movements, but by the time they came of age, society had already changed and the momentum of that period had waned. As such, they are often characterized as “pragmatic idealists,” who retained a desire for change but with a more realistic approach. The name Generation Jones comes from the English expression "keeping up with the Joneses," which describes someone's attempt to keep up with others on a social and economic level, and from the word jonesing, which means intense desire or longing. Podel argued that the term captured both the competitiveness and the constant search for purpose that characterized this generation… The researchers note, however, that the boundaries between generations are not determined solely by birth date. Cultural experiences, social environment, and personal journeys significantly influence how one perceives one's generational identity. For this reason, many people belonging to Generation Jones feel they are somewhere between Baby Boomers and Generation X, without fully expressing themselves as either category. Sociologists believe that the concept of "microgenerations" contributes to a better understanding of social changes and the different experiences that shaped each age group.” Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:

Excerpt: “I recently came across a term I’d never seen before: Generation Jones. Prompt ChatGPT: Generation Jones are Americans born between 1955 and 1965. They’re late boomers shaped by Watergate, stagflation, and Reagan-era politics — more skeptical and pragmatic than their older counterparts. Hold on. That’s my g-g-g generation: too young for Woodstock, too old to identify with Gen X. Pop culture reference points: the Clash, “Happy Days,” and “Star Wars: A New Hope.″ I may be a “young Boomer,” but I feel dated in a newsroom increasingly staffed by millennials and Gen Z. That said, with that age comes perspective. Growing up in Generation Jones meant facing some of the same challenges my younger colleagues now see: economic downturns, political disillusionment, and the uneasy balance between idealism and practicality. Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:

Excerpt: Much has been made of the particular divide in sensibilities between the Baby Boomers and Generation X, but, as the Atlantic writer Jonathan Pontell identified, there is a transitional cohort, “Generation Jones,” born between ’57 and ’65, who came of age in the years where the tie dyed colours of sixties idealism had darkened into more subdued, sober hues through the years of stagflation, unemployment, sudden fears of precarity and notably, the so-called “end of history” with the fall of the Berlin Wall. Generation Jones (named for the aspirational “jonesin'” of the 60s and the generic value of the surname) leaders were “pragmatic idealists,” a little more cynical, detached and more adept in crisis situations; the best examples of Generation Jones leaders on this continent would be Barack Obama and Stephen Harper. Until now, the Liberals had leapfrogged past Generation Jones. From Paul Martin to Justin Trudeau, there was a profound shift in sensibility and style of governing. Trudeau and his inner circle made a concerted effort, with only a few exceptions, to make a clean break from Boomer-era Martin politicos. Intent on looking forward rather than back, their Gen-X idealism was focused on delivering for Millennial and Gen Z concerns: homeownership, social equity policies through a vaunted intersectional lens, a more leftward tilt on immigration as a driver of economic development. Defence? Agricultural policy? Economic sovereignty? Those were grandpa Liberal issues, from the boomer era when we couldn’t conceive of Canada as post-national. Carney the Generation Jones Prime Minister has bridged three generations more effectively and authentically. His PhD thesis foregrounded the importance of pragmatism over economic orthodoxies. His education and his years at the Bank of England gave far greater credence to his citing Havel’s “living in truth,” when he spoke at Davos. And despite his European bona fides, his perspective on Canadian culture and identity seems bred in the bone. Whether it’s paying tribute to Joni Mitchell or the team behind Heated Rivalry, he’s revealed a deep understanding of what makes these artists uniquely Canadian. He wears his Albertan beginnings as comfortably as his bespoke suits. And of course, he’s brought that worldly but grounded pragmatism to foreign affairs, taking the world as it is while middle-power coalition building and forging new trade relationships with China and India. Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:

Excerpt: “BBM belongs to the Boomer generation. Or more accurately, the micro “Generation Jones” – people born between the early 1950s and the early 1960s, identified with the counterculture, the Pill and free love. People in his age group were into sex, drugs and rock ’n’ roll. As the princeling during the Marcos dictatorship, Ferdinand Junior was dogged by rumors of being a dopehead. Whether or not the rumors are true, perhaps BBM understands the complexities of substance abuse better than the generation of his predecessor, and genuinely believes that drug addicts and small-scale pushers deserve a second chance.” Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:
“Disco, not hippies: Generation Jones says it has little in common with Baby Boomers...Generation Jones is a term social commentators affix to younger, tail-end Boomers — people who came of age in the disco-, punk-, and Watergate-obsessed 1970s, not the hippie-spawning; Vietnam War-protesting; sex, drugs, and rock-and-roll 1960s. Jonsers resent being lumped in with flower-power Boomers. They believe they share few traits and cultural touchstones with a noisy cohort that overshadowed them…The Generation Jones folks arrived between 1954 and 1964 (some say 1965), and are around 59 to 69 years old. The group includes Madonna, Magic Johnson, Bill Gates, Princess Diana, and Barack Obama, who once declared himself “the first Generation Jones president.” While many Jonesers have achieved financial success, analysts say, a large proportion has been harmed by an economy that changed dramatically as they came of age, eventually bypassing them altogether. Feeling forsaken, some stew in a culture of grievance that’s helped splinter America into warring tribes. Beyond that, as Jonesers begin to retire, many face financial uncertainty their older brethren never did… As it aged, Generation Jones changed Boomer politics along with the music. They proved to be more Republican and conservative than older Boomers, and are said to have helped elect George W. Bush and Donald Trump. Despite that, political analysts say, many Jonesers are swing voters vigorously courted by both parties…When Generation Jones members came of age in the 1970s, said Temple University professor Bryant Simon, “the political urgency of the 1960s, and the sense of unity, were gone.” The era’s galvanizing cause — the Vietnam War — was over, and the later Boomers, who had neither fought nor protested it, began a new age dubbed the “Me Decade.” It was marked by narcissism and lack of social concern, according to writer Tom Wolfe. This was, of course, the generation that spawned yuppies in the 1980s… Generation Jones graduated high school and college into the 1970s-’80s economy marked by high unemployment, wage stagnation, weakening unions, and a changeover from manufacturing to a service economy….A “white fragility” has developed among them that’s fostered anger about being left behind. Indeed, a few of the mob that stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, were Jonesers fueled by 40 years of resentment, analysts say. “You could argue,” Simon concluded, “that, in the end, this generation created the fracture we have in America today.” Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:
"After Prince’s accidental fentanyl overdose in 2016, his inscrutability has posthumously transformed him into a purple Rorschach blot for the late boomer/early Gen X cohort sometimes known as Generation Jones. These were people who came into their young adulthood in the mid-1980s, a time when prancing around in lingerie and a brocade bolero jacket with your hair teased up into an oversize pompadour was all the rage. Prince, one of the few people who could carry off this look, preached an orgiastic abandon in opposition to the staid “family values” of the Reagan-era establishment." Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:
"Boomers eh; pick your pejorative term. Entitled, bigoted, self-absorbed, old. There they are in all their grey glory (no chin or nose hair, mind) in ads for retirement homes, granny flats, adult nappies, funeral planning.mBut increasing numbers of these “aged” and “elderly” are kicking back against the Boomer label, and perhaps rightly so, because they are actually part of Generation Jones... In fact, Obama specifically uses the Gen Jones term to describe himself... Closer to home once-were-Boomers 62-year-old film impresario Sir Peter Jackson, former Miss Universe Lorraine Downes(60), broadcaster John Campbell (60), actor Jennifer Ward-Lealand (61), sailor Russell Coutts (62), former PM Sir John Key (63) and writer Elizabeth Knox (65), can also claim Jones membership. Another reason for the renaissance of the Generation J tag... is that although the term “Baby Boomer” began life as a form of demographic classification, it has since transitioned into being shorthand used to mock those of a certain age...There are quite stark differences ‒ aside from birth date ‒ that distinguish Boomers from their younger siblings, something that’s backed up by qualitative research, which shows Gen Jones really is far closer to Gen X than to Boomers‒ in everything from political inclination to spending habit...That sentiment was perfectly summed up by American film director Richard Linklater (born 1960) in a 2023 interview with the New Yorker magazine: “I was born in ’60, graduated in 1979, so I never felt like much of a Boomer. I feel a little offended being lumped in with someone who’s born in 1946. I’m, like, Wow, we grew up in a whole different world. What are you talking about? “Weren’t you sick of hearing people that were college-age or whatever in the late 60s talking about how great it was?” he said. “It was, like, ‘OK, you guys, no matter what you do, you’ll never top what we did’—you know, Woodstock and all that shit. So I was, like, ‘Yeah, guess what? We don’t need to self-mythologise. We don’t even want to.”... “New Zealand in the [early 60s] was a very grey, conservative society. But at the same time, there was full employment, there were things like free tertiary education... By the time Bollinger left high school at the end of 1974 Robert Muldoon was about to become PM, “Think Big” was looming, and mortgages were somewhere north of 12%, not that many school-leavers at the time had grand designs on owning a home. At the same time, the craziness of the 60s - yes, the sex, drugs and rock and roll - were beginning to lose their shine. Expanding your consciousness became a euphemism for going too far. But while Bollinger’s older contemporaries were preaching peace and love and being outrageous, the younger ones were looking askance at the fallout. “Basically we stepped into a world that was ceasing to be the land of milk and honey. There was a series of economic shocks. Suddenly unemployment started going up. “There was a sort of souring if you like. There was a point where our end of the generation started to go, actually, hang on a minute. These people, they had a lot of privilege, a lot of opportunities, which are now drying up, and they didn't exactly create a great path for the next generation. “We felt the whole system was screwed. I think that was a direct response to what our end of the generation saw as the failures of the Boomers, and it forced [us] to be a bit more realistic.”... "Which brings us back to Chlöe Swarbrick. Her “OK Boomer” comment, she later explained, was off-the-cuff, but symbolic of the “collective exhaustion of multiple generations set to inherit ever-amplifying problems in an ever-diminishing window of time.” There’s plenty of Jonesers who would agree with that.”
Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:
“I’m dating myself (again), this time, I suppose, by admitting that I still buy DVDs. That’s my Generation Jones fondness for ownership, and my own hoarding instinct, but there’s something else at play." Rely on a streaming service and things can, in our age of cancellation, either disappear, never to be seen again, or they can be tinkered with, perhaps to remove a scene now deemed offensive or, less malignly, for artistic reasons… The answer, therefore, for strict originalists, unwilling to try their luck and the law by recording content streamed on, say, Netflix, is not to hesitate too long before buying the DVD version of any movie or show they wish to preserve in all its original glory.”
Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:
“Boomers Are Better Classified Into Two Distinct Groups...Some people split baby boomers into two smaller groups, partly because the generation spans so many years, but also because their young life experiences were so radically different. Early boomers, or leading-edge boomers, were born between 1946-1954 and are currently 69-77….Generation Jones — were born between 1955-1964 and are currently 59-68. Unlike the older set, most of their parents were not World War II veterans and they grew up with no military draft after the Civil Rights, Women’s Rights and other major political movements had already transpired.” Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:
“The 1969 moon landing remains a vivid memory...the event embedded within me an early realization that the unthinkable could be achieved. And, as the world begins its long slog to recovery post-Covid-19, that moonshot mindset is precisely what we need right now...Life-changing impressions such as the moon landing can occur in a nanosecond, helping to shape generational mindsets and behaviors. Only by segmenting generations can we identify links between people’s formative experiences and their values, viewpoints, and visions today...When I look at the visionaries at the vanguard of progress today, many bear the indelible marks of the summer of ’69 and the space age begun a decade earlier. I think of those in the second half of the Boomer cohort... who sit on the cusp between the older Boomers and Gen-X...members of Generation Jones...this group came of age with a moonshot mindset and the knowledge that big dreams can become big realities... more curious than rebellious. Many of the best-known were studious, cerebral, and bookish types—unconstrained by geographic borders. To them, nerds were the new rock stars. I don’t consider it a coincidence that Tim Berners-Lee, Steve Jobs, and Bill Gates were all born in 1955 and entered high school around the time Neil Armstrong left those historic footprints on the Sea of Tranquility...now rewriting the rules of the present. They are leading efforts to combat climate change, innovating to serve and protect consumers, conducting business through a more global, equitable, and inclusive lens, and collaborating to disrupt outdated status quos...the impact formative experiences such as the moon landing have had on the generation offers pathways of insight and connection. Only by understanding the unique set of commonalities that color each generational cohort can we provide products and services that resonate. This is especially critical in a time of pandemic and radical change—a time ripe with opportunities for marketers and visionaries to map the moonshots of the future.” Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:
“The squeezed ones are Gen X, born between 1965 and 1980. They are sometimes known as the “baby bust” generation because the birth rate went down as my generation of US Boomer women decided to delay childbirth or to have no children at all. On one side of them are Generation Jones, born from 1954-64. They were children during Watergate, the oil crisis and stagflation. The name comes from “keeping up with the Joneses”, but if they have a “jones” or craving to become president they’ve barely shown it yet. Only Obama, born in 1961, has made it to the White House, although Kamala Harris (born 1964) still might. On the other side of the generation couch are the millennials, born between 1981 and 1996 and Generation Z, born from the mid-1990s to about the early 2010s. In terms of age, Gen X and millennials should be completely running the electoral show now. But they aren’t, by and large. In the US, a great deal of wealth is held by an older demographic in property, businesses and investments. Older campaigners have bigger war chests for campaigning because older people just tend to have more money. Another reason that Gen X and Gen Jones are not dominating the electoral field is that while the US median age might be 38.6, the median age for US voters at the local level is almost 60 years of age. We Boomers tend to head to the ballot box to express ourselves politically. Younger people: not so much.” Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt: “I am a Generation Jones mother with two millennial children in their 30s, and the end of the world is nigh. I am really, really, very sorry but I have become OK with my children remaining childless. Having another generation to worry about seems overwhelming… I’m a worrier. Throughout my nearly 40 years of parenting, I’ve anticipated illness, injury, all manner of car accidents, bad partners, and even the proverbial acting out. And I feel like I have risen to meet the challenges, even as those morphed from the benign to the serious. I learned quickly that getting the kids grown up just meant a different set of concerns… My kids and I talk about most everything; they’re delightful adults, smart, funny, keen to learn, politically involved. But my first instinct has always been to protect them. To monitor my own increasing existential dread, but also acknowledge the failure of generations to manifest the Utopia we were striving for… For many years, I longed for grandchildren, until I didn’t. How could I foist imminent doom on yet another generation when I still feel responsible for the children I had?… I think our doom will come with hubris and greed. The decimation of our natural resources, all used up to power machines. We are teetering on the edge, and it is likely the end of us. As my son so succinctly put it last time we spoke: “It’s hard to know enough to know how scared we should be” And I am well and truly sorry to be leaving that fear and its conundrum to the generations that follow mine.” Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:
From the “Judge John” humor column: “Glenn writes: My teenager Heath calls me a “boomer.” While I accept that all teenagers despise their parents, I object to the label; I was born in 1963. I grew up with stagflation, Devo and AIDS. Please order Heath to refer to my generation by its correct, dismal name: “Generation Jones.”” Judge John’s answer: “I’d never heard of “Generation Jones” before, because I have no interest in you, Grandpa. I was born in 1971! I am still young and cool, like AOL and the dismantling of welfare in the name of political triangulation! How could I know there was this new term to describe your tiny, 1954-65 economy-plus section on this sad flight to oblivion we both share? But OK, Joneser. I’ll order your teen to call you by your name. I’m sure Heath will be moved by the opinion of this 50-year-old man once you clip this print magazine article and fax it to them.” Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:
“The films’ subjects and interviewees belong to the first wave of baby boomers, and the filmmakers belong to the younger cohort of that group, aka Generation Jones — the kids who missed hippiedom by a few years but still absorbed the countercultural idealism. The kids who bought the albums… Is it any wonder that punks would arise to pounce on the “dinosaurs” of the music business? Or that Generation Jones, caught between the boomer vanguard and Gen X’s ironic detachment, might unapologetically enjoy both the megastars and the punks?” Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:
“The VP candidate grew up in a cultural moment that demanded a foot in different worlds. Is that a strength or a weakness now?... Kamala Harris is a Prince fan, and while you may think you already know a lot about her, her adoration of the Purple One is truly all you need to understand her in the context of 2020’s political craziness. She grew up in a subgeneration of integration babies, sandwiched between Boomers and Gen Xers, post civil rights, witnesses to hip-hop’s earliest days...At age 55, the child of intellectuals in Northern California, she’s part of a cohort often ignored by demographers, Generation Jones, those of us who came of age during the Reagan years. We missed out on the Black Power Movement, the sexual revolution and women’s lib, Vietnam and Woodstock. All this shapes Harris the politician, for good and for not-so-good. As a Generation Joneser, she’s the Jan Brady of American politics, the perpetual middle child, wondering why we can’t all get along. And tonight, on the debate stage, facing off against Vice President Mike Pence, another (older) Joneser, she’ll be trying to thread a needle that’s getting harder to thread every year... Like Harris, I’m a middle-class Generation Joneser, a Black preppie who also swore allegiance to his Purple Majesty...Compromise and consensus are a key personality trait of Generation Jonesers, particularly among Jonesers of color, said Jonathan Pontell, a social generation expert, who coined the phrase. But that compromising nature, in this era of political extremes, can seem out of step, something for which both Harris and Obama have faced criticism...Jonesers, he said, were weaned on idealism as kids in the ’70s, only to be confronted as young adults with the money-hungry cynicism of the ’80s. We were the guinea pigs living through the real changes effected by the turmoil of the ’60s, turmoil we were too young to understand. As integration babies, Black Jonesers were raised with high expectations, expected to excel, to bust ceilings...Prince knew all this, tapping into the angst of a subgeneration. He always looked askance at the poor hand we’d been dealt, but he hid from the world, choosing to shroud himself in mystery.” Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:
“Jeff Foxworthy certainly did not win over any millennials with a new yet very old joke. The comedian, best known for his “you might be a redneck” shtick from the 1990s, quipped about participation trophies in his new Netflix special called “The Good Old Days.” Foxworthy, whose 1958 birth date makes him a baby boomer (though he may identify as a late baby boomer or Generation Jones), made plenty of observational jokes about older and younger generations throughout his special. But like many boomers, he suggested life was at its best when he was young, had “energy to burn” and “played every sport” — which became the setup for what he may have thought was a really sick burn.” Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:
"The cars—all between model years 1969 and 1972—represent a solid cross-section of the autumn years of the first-generation Mustang, and they give us an interesting look into the mind and circumstances of their seller, Stephen Yousey...At age 60, Yousey is the typical Generation Jones baby boomer—old enough to remember these cars when they were new, but too young to have participated in the muscle car revolution (a cohort your author also falls into)." Click Here for Full Original Article  

Excerpt:

Excerpt: “I was watching a programme over the Christmas period, and at one point it featured a young grandson berating his grandmother for the shocking state of the ecology. Especially our use of plastic and the waste problems it is causing. “It’s your generations fault” he said. Maybe not! It wasn’t clear what generation the grandparent came from, but either Baby Boomers: born 1946 to 1964 or Generation Jones: born 1955 to 1965. After a few moments, the grandparent brought the child back to reality. If you belong to one of the above post-war generations, and many of us do, let’s get the facts straight. We are not to blame.” Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:
"The Chuck Taylors seemed like a clue. Kamala D. Harris declared the Converse sneakers her go-to kicks. So when the Biden-Harris ticket emerged victorious, millions of former Benetton shoppers could rejoice at the underlying achievement: A member of Generation X had reached the White House for the first time. Then came the deniers. Harris was born in 1964, they noted, which is universally accepted as the last year of the baby boomer generation — and well, kids, rules are rules. Some people insist Harris belongs to a group that straddles the boomers and the Gen Xers, called Generation Jones… Harris declined to answer these questions when The Washington Post asked, and wouldn’t say which generation she identifies with.” Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:
“It’s human nature to cognitively structure our thinking—classifying, categorising, and constructing schemas to make sense of the world… I recall growing up with baby boomers giving out about GenX and vice versa. "OK, Boomer" is by no means a novel insult, just presented differently. Of course, since I was little, a new generation or two or maybe even three (depending on the conceptualisation you follow) has come into existence and has been the focus of discussion…how is it that some cite the generation as ranging roughly 10 to 15 years and others as 20? This presents an important contextual question: Is a generation a function of time (i.e., enough so to develop to adulthood before the onset of a new generation); or is it a function of key events that define the era (e.g., the fall of Berlin Wall or Internet availability in nearly every home)?...If we re-examine pre-Gen X, the Boomer generation is often broken down into two groups—one having come of age with the Vietnam War—"early Boomers"—and those who missed it—Generation Jones (i.e., 1955–1965). Arguably, Generation Jones might be considered a precursor or even the first stage of GenX (i.e., making the latter longer). But, then, coupling those instead would make the Boomer generation only 10 years… In determining what generation is what, all conceptualisations agree that there is a range and that said generation is "defined" by an event or series of events. However, an important issue that is largely missing from most conceptualisations (and is of utmost importance from a psychological standpoint) is the issue of to what generation did one’s parents belong...” Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:
“So much of our current national strife is predicated on how much better things were Back Then. For younger people, “back then” is the time they can barely remember, before Donald Trump began polluting our politics. For some people, it’s the years just before 9/11. Others have fond childhood memories of their first game system, in the 1990s, or their narrow ties and big hair from the ’80s. My generation—call us Gen Jones, wedged between the Boomers and the Xers—grew up in the late ’60s, a nice time to be a child but a period of frightening turmoil for anyone older than us.
Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:
“There’s a contingent of us I’ll call the transition generation — not shirt-waisted homemakers like my mom, not as unfettered as my daughter — a shadow constituency ready to make one more run at the future. And if you still consider boomer an epithet, think again: Kamala Harris is one, though barely, born just two months before the category expired at the end of 1964, part of a younger crowd so different from early boomers, in experience and perspective, that it has its own name, Generation Jones.”
Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt:

Excerpt: Generation Jones (ages 61-72) came of age during rising inflation and an oil crisis, so it's back in the cockpit for these digital pioneers as they navigate retirement. Generation Jones grew up during economic, political and technical upheaval, from Watergate to the Iran hostage crisis, inflation to a crippling oil shock. The idealism of older boomers gave way to pragmatism (the awful "Me Generation" moniker) and a fascination with technology. Blockbusters like the "Star Wars" trilogy, "Rocky" and "Jaws" chronicled the scrappy little guy winning against a bully or the establishment by being gutsier or smarter. Now nearing or in retirement, this generation once again faces disruption. Not familiar with Generation Jones? This micro-generation was born between 1954 and 1965, sandwiched between older baby boomers and Gen X. This demographic cohort, coined by cultural commentator Jonathan Pontell, missed out on the hippie era that culminated at the Woodstock music festival. And even though younger Generation Jones members watched "Happy Days," the disillusionment and pessimism stemming from their not-so-happy economic experiences in early adulthood stick with them to this day. "Every generation and micro-generation comes with their own unique biases, experiences and baggage," says Susan Green, senior financial adviser at Wescott Financial Advisory Group. “It can be hard to move on from that." Today, Generation Jones, who are aged in the range of 61 to 72, are still Jonesing to get their financial house in order. And they are entering retirement at a time of unprecedented technological change with AI's advantages and threats. Key retirement questions for Generation Jones Their age range puts them at a pivotal point in the transition to retirement and planning for their golden years. The youngest Jonesers, now 61, are in the final stretch of their working years. They must choose whether to turn Social Security on early at age 62 and take a 30% benefit cut, or wait until full retirement age (FRA) to receive their full benefit, or delay taking Social Security until age 70, which boosts their benefit by 8% for each year after FRA. Medicare enrollment begins at age 65, another major milestone Generation Jones must navigate. They must also map out a plan for required minimum distributions (RMDs), which kick in at age 73 (or age 75 for those born in 1960 or later) for traditional retirement accounts, and for drawing down their retirement account savings. "They're at a very crucial stage for planning," says Dave Sharpe, a wealth manager at Savvy Advisors. "A lot of decision windows open up between age 62 and 73." Fortunately, Generation Jones has socked away some money, thanks to workplace retirement plans like 401(k)s and individual retirement accounts (IRAs). Jonesers wondering if their net worth and retirement balances are sufficient to fund a secure retirement can get a baseline of where they stand by comparing their personal bottom line with peers in their age group. What is the net worth of Generation Jones? Let's start with net worth by decades. Since Generation Jones ranges in age from 61 to 72, the best snapshot is looking at the net worth of people in their 60s. There's good news and not-so-good news, depending on whether you're looking at averages (which include high earners and more financially successful folks from Generation Jones) or median numbers (which strip out high earners and low earners and reflect a midpoint number). The average net worth of people in their 60s is $1,577,907, a hefty seven-figure nest egg that suggests a solid retirement for a large swath of Generation Jones, according to data from the Empower Personal Dashboard as of January 2026. But the median net worth of only $274,564 paints a less robust picture of Generation Jones' retirement readiness. Net worth starts to decline when Generation Jones reaches their 70s, as they begin taking distributions from their retirement accounts. The average net worth for people in their 70s shrinks to $1.46 million and the median net worth drops to $220,067, according to Empower. The financial picture of Generation Jones looks similar, if not a bit rosier, using net worth data from the Federal Reserve. The 55 to 64 age cohort (which includes the youngest members of Generation Jones, aged 61 to 64) has an average net worth of $1.57 million, and the 65 to 74 age group (which includes those in Generation Jones, aged 65 to 72) has a net worth of $1.79 million. When it comes to median net worth, the Fed data show Generation Jones in a stronger yet still vulnerable position. People aged 55 to 64 have a median net worth of $364,500 and those between the ages of 65 to 74 clock in at $409,900. What is average 401(k) balance of Generation Jones? When you look at the financial might of Generation Jones through the lens of the average 401(k) balance, the picture looks less optimistic. The average 401(k) balance for plan participants in their 60s was just $269,100, and $273,100 for retirement savers in their 70s, according to Fidelity Investments' 4Q25 Retirement Analysis. Key financial planning decisions for Generation Jones Since Generation Jones includes pre-retirees, recent retirees and early retirees, there are a lot of important planning decisions to consider. "There are so many things happening in quick succession and a lot of decisions that have to be made," says Green. Generation Jones is transitioning from a period in their lives when they receive a regular paycheck to paying themselves from the assets they have built up in savings over their working years. Key financial decisions that must be made include: Social Security claiming decision. By virtue of their age (61 to 72), Generation Jones has to make the all-important decision about when to start Social Security, which provides a guaranteed monthly income for life. This financial decision not only determines when they'll start receiving a check but also the size of the monthly payment. Whether to start benefits at age 62, full retirement age (FRA is 67 for those born in 1960 or later) or delay until age 70, depends on whether one needs the money, life expectancy guesstimates, and health status. "There are a lot of factors that are going to influence the decision," says Green. The youngest members of Generation Jones can start taking Social Security as early as age 62. The downside of taking benefits this early is the benefit shrinks by 30% permanently over one's lifetime. If you've stopped working and need Social Security to make ends meet, then taking benefits early despite the lower payout may be necessary. "It may be less of a decision and more of a necessity to turn Social Security on," says Green. Similarly, if you're in poor health and expect a shorter lifespan, turning benefits on early and maximizing your benefits in the here and now may be the way to go. "Everybody is going to pass away, and though we don't know when, we can at least make some educated decisions," says Green. For those with a family history of longevity, however, holding off until FRA and receiving 100% of earned benefits, or delaying benefits until age 70 to get an 8% benefit increase for each year after FRA, makes more financial sense. Be sure to calculate the so-called "breakeven point," or the point at which the later-claimed benefits catch up to and exceed the value of taking benefits earlier. "The breakeven cost analysis is one of the most important things to look at," says Sharpe. If you opt to wait until 70 to claim benefits, make sure you have enough assets to build a so-called "Social Security bridge." This strategy addresses the funding gap that results from not receiving a Social Security check in the years before you start taking benefits. If you're pulling money from retirement accounts, the more tax-efficient your withdrawals are, the better. "What assets can you pull from without creating a huge tax burden?" says Green. Cash withdrawals are tax-free, as are qualified withdrawals from Roth retirement accounts. Taxable brokerage accounts benefit from lower capital gains rates of 0%, 15% and 20%. Traditional retirement accounts are taxed at regular income tax rates, which range from 10% to 37%. Work with your financial advisor to map out the most tax-efficient withdrawal strategy. Managing Medicare premiums While Medicare eligibility begins at age 65, it's important to start planning before then. The main reason is that Medicare is not free, and your premiums for Medicare Part B (medical insurance) and Medicare Part D (prescription drug coverage) could spike if your taxable income tops certain income thresholds. These monthly surcharges, which are in addition to standard premiums, are called IRMAA, which stands for "income-related monthly adjustment amount." Planning is so important because the surcharge is based on income calculations with a two-year lag. So, whether you pay an IRMAA surcharge in a given year depends on your tax returns from two years ago. Any surcharges for 2027, for example, will be based on your 2025 tax return. "So, the decisions you make at age 62 or 63 have a big impact on Medicare costs," says Sharpe. "Higher Medicare costs for people who aren't expecting them can be devastating to those not prepared to pay the surcharge." Members of Generation Jones who have $1 million or more in their 401(k)s are particularly vulnerable to IRMAA surcharges because their seven-digit portfolios can lead to high RMDs, which could push their income above the IRMAA income thresholds. Retirement fund distribution strategies. Generation Jones must also come up with a tax-efficient retirement plan distribution strategy that doesn't result in generating so much income that they bump up to a higher tax bracket, Sharpe adds. To avoid massive RMDs, Sharpe recommends taking some distributions from 401(k)s and IRAs in the years leading up to age 73 or 75, when RMDs kick in, as this will lower the account balance and reduce the RMDs. He also recommends that Generation Jones run the numbers to see whether they should convert money from traditional 401(k)s, which tax withdrawals as ordinary income, to Roth accounts (a "Roth conversion"). You may withdraw from Roths tax-free as long as two conditions are met. First, you must be at least 59½ years old to avoid an early withdrawal penalty. Since all of the Jonesers are at least 61, the requirement is moot. Second, the "5-year rule" still applies, meaning they will face penalties when withdrawing any earnings (not contributions) if the account has been open less than 5 years. Of course, when it comes to a retirement portfolio, if a member of Generation Jones is behind in their savings, there is still time to play catch-up by maxing out their workplace retirement account or IRA and also taking advantage of catch-up matching contributions available to anyone over age 50. In 2026, the IRS allows 401(k) contributions up to $24,500, standard catch-up contributions of $8,000, or a special "super catch-up" limit of $11,250 for savers aged 60 to 63. The maximum IRA contribution in 2026 is $7,500, with a $1,100 catch-up for those 50 and older. Another benefit of saving more in traditional retirement accounts funded with pre-tax dollars is that it reduces taxable income, which could help savers stay below income thresholds such as IRMAA and avoid bumping up to a higher tax bracket. Members of Generation Jones who still need growth in their portfolios should avoid getting too conservative, taking too little risk and investing only in low-yielding assets like cash and bonds, adds Green. "There's a long runway in retirement and you still need money (in stocks) working harder for you," says Green. "There are definitely ways to catch up and strategies to lower your taxable income," says Sharpe. Click Here for Full Original Article

Article about the Cusack siblings who are actors, including John (e.g. Say Anything), Joan (e.g. Working Girl) and Ann (e.g. A League of Their Own). Ann feels a strong personal connection with her membership in Generation Jones, and believes emphatically that she is not a Baby Boomer, nor a Gen Xer, but rather part of Gen Jones in-between. Her connection to Gen Jones is so strong that when she decided to start a blues band, she chose to call it Ann Cusack & the Generation Jones Band: “When she’s not acting in projects like Mr. Mercedes and Better Call Saul, Ann sings with Ann Cusack & the Generation Jones Band. They perform “original R & B and classic blues songs, with help from Big Mama Thornton, Little Milton, B.B. King, Koko Taylor, and Mighty Sam McClain to name a few.” Click Here for Full Original Article

Excerpt: “They are now carrying life-by-app into retirement and reshaping the longevity economy. On-demand living, from home services to grocery delivery to ride-sharing, was once framed as the domain of convenience-hungry Millennials and Gen Z’ers. But look around any neighborhood on any given day and you’ll see a different reality unfolding. A steady rotation of Amazon drivers, Instacart shoppers, Uber and Lyft rides, and TaskRabbit handypeople increasingly serve older adults, not just the young. New data from Morning Consult’s Fastest Growing Brands 2025 report confirms what the sidewalks, lobbies, and driveways already reveal. Tracking consumer consideration across more than 2,500 brands, the report shows that… those born between 1955 and 1964, are adopting DoorDash services at a faster pace than the generations once assumed to dominate them. These are not casual, one-off users. They are regulars, people who have woven app-enabled services into daily routines: Instacart groceries, Uber rides to appointments, TaskRabbit help for what was once provided by a spouse, adult child, or neighbor in older age. What began as a convenience during peak career years has quietly become a lifestyle. And that lifestyle habit is about to go with them into retirement. The future of retirement living is being shaped by 60-somethings tapping an app...they...represent the first generation that spent their peak working years in a fully digital economy. They booked business travel online, summoned Ubers between meetings, ordered take-out with a tap on exhausted weeknights, maintained online banking, and outsourced errands and chores to save time and energy. They cultivated decades of smartphone fluency long before entering older age. For them, app-based living is not a novelty; it is a norm… This shift intersects directly with another powerful demographic trend: the rise of solo aging. Nearly a third of all US households now consist of a single adult. The highest level in history...Divorce, widowhood, and the growing likelihood of entering retirement without a partner all expand the role of on-demand services… Life at the tap of an app comes with its own price tag, which retirement planning must now recognize. On-demand services, while empowering, introduce recurring costs that previous generations did not have to budget for: meal delivery fees, grocery-delivery subscriptions, rideshare use, on-demand home maintenance, pharmacy delivery, virtual health visits, and the expanding ecosystem of smart-home technologies. What was once discretionary spending to free up time becomes part of the retirement living run rate in older age. As life expectancy rises and solo aging becomes more common, these services should be viewed not just as occasional conveniences but as a new line item in retirement planning. According to AARP, the vast majority of Americans say they would prefer to age in place. A preference that will increasingly depend not on family support but on a functioning service ecosystem. DoorDash and Instacart will sustain nutrition. Uber, Lyft, and GoGoGrandparent will provide mobility and connection. TaskRabbit and Handy will substitute for the “son-in-law with tools.” Amazon and pharmacy delivery will support medication adherence. Telehealth and smart-home sensors will monitor safety and health in the background. Aging-in-place will look less like “I live independently” and more like “I manage a personalized supply chain.”… Younger Boomers, often called Generation Jones, have never quite fit into the cultural narrative written for their older peers. Too young for Woodstock but too old for Gen X, they grew up in the shadow of Vietnam and Watergate, entered adulthood during periods of recession and inflation, and shaped their career paths amid the rise of personal technology rather than the analog habits of early Boomers. Today, they might be the generation that quietly redefines what life in older age will look like. For them, technology-enabled services won’t be seen as innovations in aging or AgeTech; they’ll just be part of everyday life... It is a significant demographic shift. The habits they've built in midlife will define the financial planning, housing expectations, care models, and more they will expect in the coming decades. The organizations that recognize this shift will be designing for the future. The ones that don’t will find themselves building solutions for a customer who no longer exists. Click Here for Full Original Article