Why Gen Z is a boardroom issue now: Rajesh Shukla, MD & CEO, PRICE
What CEOs must unlearn to win in the next decade and beyond.
- Jan 22, 2026,
- Updated Jan 22, 2026 3:58 PM IST
For the first time in decades, India’s corporate leadership is confronting a generation that cannot be won with speed, scale or storytelling alone. Generation Z, or Gen Z—those aged between 13 and 29—is not impatient; it moves with intent. It is not anti-brand; it is against tall promises. And it is not rejecting consumption; it is redesigning the conditions under which consumption earns trust.
Data collected during the first fortnight of December 2025, from an analysis of more than 4,300 GenZers across metros and Tier II cities, points to a clear conclusion. They are not asking firms to market better; they are asking them to build better. That is why Gen Z is no longer a marketing problem, it is a CEO question.
Most leadership teams still approach Gen Z as a youthful segment to be decoded through platforms, influencers and formats. That is dangerously incomplete. Gen Z’s behaviour cuts across pricing logic, product architecture, credit models, experience design and capital allocation. This generation spends carefully, saves early and upgrades selectively. For instance, over 40% of GenZers already saves 20–40% of their income, even at an early stage of career, while 16% save more than 40%, typical of older cohorts.
It prioritises quality over brand reputation, value over visibility, and flexibility over ownership. When asked what most influences purchase decisions, product quality ranks first for 43% of GenZers, consistently ahead of brand reputation (26%) or influencer recommendations (just 6%). This is a generation persuaded by substance.
In effect, Gen Z behaves less like a target audience and more like a risk committee, scrutinising claims, questioning value and delaying commitment until confidence is earned. Nearly 78% say they are either very likely or somewhat likely to switch brands if a better alternative appears.
One of the most persistent misreads about Gen Z is that it lacks aspiration. Gen Z aspires for career growth, financial security, home ownership and global travel. More than 50% say they aspire to buy both a home and a car. What has changed is timing. Big-ticket purchases are postponed, not abandoned. Premium brands are sampled, not rejected.
Even in luxury, nuance matters. Over 70% say they either occasionally or regularly buy premium brands, yet only a minority commits exclusively. The dominant behaviour is trial. Credit, too, is approached cautiously. One-third of GenZers say they never borrow for discretionary spending, while most borrowing, when it happens, is informal—friends, family or limited credit.
The mistake is to confuse delayed commitment with disinterest. Many companies respond by forcing urgency through discounts, influencer amplification or emotional pressure. That often backfires.
Across categories, Gen Z is optimising for four things: clarity on what it is paying for, control over when and how it commits, consistency in brand behaviour over time, and credibility between promise and performance. This explains why quick commerce is used frequently for daily needs by over 60% of urban GenZers, while physical retail dominates categories where trust and inspection matter.
It also explains digital behaviour. While Instagram remains the most influential platform, nearly 40% say they only “rarely” or “sometimes” purchase after seeing products on social media.
The implication for CEOs is unavoidable: growth with Gen Z is progressive, not explosive. The companies that win will be those that design for progression, low-risk entry points, transparent value tiers and clear upgrade paths aligned with readiness, not advertising pressure.
This requires a shift in leadership metrics. Acquisition must give way to retention. Quarterly spikes must give way to lifetime value. Brand salience must give way to brand reliability. It also requires restraint. In a Gen Z world, premature premiumisation destroys trust and trust, once lost, is rarely recovered.
This matters because Gen Z is only at the beginning of its economic journey. Over the next decade, it will drive India’s largest wave of first-time asset ownership, premium services adoption and consumption.
In investment terms, Gen Z does not deliver momentum; it delivers duration. That distinction will separate enduring franchises from those that enjoy only temporary relevance.
That brings the conversation back to the boardroom question. Are you building a business that a 22-year-old can start with today and still believe in at 32? Does your model reward caution or punish it?
CEOs who answer these questions correctly will not just win Gen Z market share. They will secure relevance, resilience and renewal for the next decade. That may be the only advantage that truly compounds.
Views are personal. The author is the MD and CEO at People Research on India's Consumer Economy (PRICE).
For the first time in decades, India’s corporate leadership is confronting a generation that cannot be won with speed, scale or storytelling alone. Generation Z, or Gen Z—those aged between 13 and 29—is not impatient; it moves with intent. It is not anti-brand; it is against tall promises. And it is not rejecting consumption; it is redesigning the conditions under which consumption earns trust.
Data collected during the first fortnight of December 2025, from an analysis of more than 4,300 GenZers across metros and Tier II cities, points to a clear conclusion. They are not asking firms to market better; they are asking them to build better. That is why Gen Z is no longer a marketing problem, it is a CEO question.
Most leadership teams still approach Gen Z as a youthful segment to be decoded through platforms, influencers and formats. That is dangerously incomplete. Gen Z’s behaviour cuts across pricing logic, product architecture, credit models, experience design and capital allocation. This generation spends carefully, saves early and upgrades selectively. For instance, over 40% of GenZers already saves 20–40% of their income, even at an early stage of career, while 16% save more than 40%, typical of older cohorts.
It prioritises quality over brand reputation, value over visibility, and flexibility over ownership. When asked what most influences purchase decisions, product quality ranks first for 43% of GenZers, consistently ahead of brand reputation (26%) or influencer recommendations (just 6%). This is a generation persuaded by substance.
In effect, Gen Z behaves less like a target audience and more like a risk committee, scrutinising claims, questioning value and delaying commitment until confidence is earned. Nearly 78% say they are either very likely or somewhat likely to switch brands if a better alternative appears.
One of the most persistent misreads about Gen Z is that it lacks aspiration. Gen Z aspires for career growth, financial security, home ownership and global travel. More than 50% say they aspire to buy both a home and a car. What has changed is timing. Big-ticket purchases are postponed, not abandoned. Premium brands are sampled, not rejected.
Even in luxury, nuance matters. Over 70% say they either occasionally or regularly buy premium brands, yet only a minority commits exclusively. The dominant behaviour is trial. Credit, too, is approached cautiously. One-third of GenZers say they never borrow for discretionary spending, while most borrowing, when it happens, is informal—friends, family or limited credit.
The mistake is to confuse delayed commitment with disinterest. Many companies respond by forcing urgency through discounts, influencer amplification or emotional pressure. That often backfires.
Across categories, Gen Z is optimising for four things: clarity on what it is paying for, control over when and how it commits, consistency in brand behaviour over time, and credibility between promise and performance. This explains why quick commerce is used frequently for daily needs by over 60% of urban GenZers, while physical retail dominates categories where trust and inspection matter.
It also explains digital behaviour. While Instagram remains the most influential platform, nearly 40% say they only “rarely” or “sometimes” purchase after seeing products on social media.
The implication for CEOs is unavoidable: growth with Gen Z is progressive, not explosive. The companies that win will be those that design for progression, low-risk entry points, transparent value tiers and clear upgrade paths aligned with readiness, not advertising pressure.
This requires a shift in leadership metrics. Acquisition must give way to retention. Quarterly spikes must give way to lifetime value. Brand salience must give way to brand reliability. It also requires restraint. In a Gen Z world, premature premiumisation destroys trust and trust, once lost, is rarely recovered.
This matters because Gen Z is only at the beginning of its economic journey. Over the next decade, it will drive India’s largest wave of first-time asset ownership, premium services adoption and consumption.
In investment terms, Gen Z does not deliver momentum; it delivers duration. That distinction will separate enduring franchises from those that enjoy only temporary relevance.
That brings the conversation back to the boardroom question. Are you building a business that a 22-year-old can start with today and still believe in at 32? Does your model reward caution or punish it?
CEOs who answer these questions correctly will not just win Gen Z market share. They will secure relevance, resilience and renewal for the next decade. That may be the only advantage that truly compounds.
Views are personal. The author is the MD and CEO at People Research on India's Consumer Economy (PRICE).