I did not expect to write about my old seminar paper again. But a few things came together at the same time, and suddenly it felt very current.
My partner recently finished his CAS in Applied Machine Learning and Information Processing at ETH. Watching him go through his exams and readings reminded me of my own CAS in Corporate Psychology at Kalaidos University of Applied Sciences Switzerland, and the seminar paper I wrote in 2021: "Framing through social networks: How does framing influence employer positioning on social media about Generation Z?"
So I did what I usually do. I sat with it again and asked myself: what did I see then? What do I see now? And what did I not look at enough?
What my seminar paper was actually about
In simple terms, my paper looked at how companies try to position themselves for Gen Z on social media. I went through research, surveys, and concrete examples of how employers present themselves on platforms like LinkedIn and Instagram when they want to speak to younger candidates. Then I compared that with what studies at the time were saying about Gen Z's values and expectations.
The same themes kept showing: flexibility, flat hierarchies, learning and development, meaningful work, impact, friendly teams, casual office vibes. My goal was to understand how those signals lined up with what we actually knew about Gen Z at work and to turn that into practical advice.
Back then, the focus was clear for me: how do employers need to frame themselves to be attractive to Gen Z? It was mainly a branding and expectations question.
Reading about Gen Z identity again, a few years later
A piece I read about Gen Z identity at work added a new layer. It not only listed what Gen Z wants from employers. It tried to describe what it feels like to be a young worker in the middle of all this. I am a millennial, by the way.
It spoke about an identity crunch: the tension between wanting stability and meaning, wanting to do the right thing, and at the same time trying to build a career in environments still shaped by older norms and high expectations.
That stretched my original question. It was no longer only how do employers frame themselves, but also what is happening inside the people these messages are aimed at? I realised I had mostly looked at the outside of the story.
Then and now: what actually changed for me
When I wrote the paper, I leaned heavily on what studies were saying about Gen Z in the workplace: they care about learning and development, value flexibility, want meaningful work, and clearer boundaries than the classic live to work model. I still think that is true. What changed for me is the background I see behind those preferences.
In the last few years, the conversation around Gen Z has shifted. We still talk about expectations towards employers, but we also speak much more openly about anxiety, burnout, money worries, and what it does to you when you grow up permanently online.
Once you see that, their wish for flexibility, boundaries, and purpose looks quite different. It is less trend and more this is how I try to stay okay in a world that does not feel very stable.
When I now reread my own paper, the ingredients are the same, but they sit differently:
- Flexible working is still attractive, but it is also a way to handle uncertainty and overload.
- Purpose still matters, but it also helps to make sense of work when long-term security feels fragile.
- Boundaries are not laziness. In many cases, they are the minimum needed to stay mentally healthy and productive.
What I did not look at enough back then
One thing I did not build into my seminar paper strongly enough is the mental health side. I looked at values, messages, and preferences. I did not go very deep into what it means when a whole generation reports higher levels of stress, anxiety, and depressive symptoms and then walks with that into the workplace.
From that angle, the Gen Z identity question at work is not only about fit and attraction. It is also about emotional cost.
Trying to build a clear sense of self as a young worker while jobs, technologies, and expectations keep shifting is demanding on its own. Doing that while also dealing with online comparison, economic uncertainty, and constant crisis headlines adds another layer. It is not surprising that questions like who am I in this organisation and what kind of life am I building around this job feel heavy.
Why this matters for employers
Because I work in HR and recruiting, I am careful not to slide into a simple companies are doing it wrong story. That is not helpful, and it is also not true. Organisations are under pressure too. They are dealing with market changes, digitalization, cost discussions, and their own identity questions. Many are genuinely trying to respond to Gen Z's needs while keeping the business running.
The more useful question is: what can we see more clearly now than a few years ago?
We can see that employer branding for Gen Z cannot promise flexibility and purpose if everyday life in the organisation contradicts that. We can see that mental health and identity are not side topics. They shape how young people experience culture, leadership, and workload. And we can see that generational research gives us patterns, but every person still arrives with their own story and limits.
Where this leaves me right now
I am somewhere between analysis and curiosity. I still think that how we frame ourselves as employers matters. Words and images shape expectations, and expectations shape whether people apply and stay.
At the same time, I now see the identity and mental health questions as just as central. Gen Z workers are not only evaluating job offers. Many of them are trying to build a life that does not burn them out before thirty.
If you work with Gen Z, or if you are part of that generation yourself, I would really like to hear your view. What have you noticed about how identity, expectations, and mental health show up in your workplace, and what do you wish more people understood about it?