Last December I had written about how India?s three generations: the Retro (above 45 years of age) and Compromise (between 30 and 45 years) generations seem to have connived with this country?s peculiar socio-eco-political circumstances to create the Zap86, a generation widely divergent from them. These below-30 youngsters, particularly those born in 1986 who were 5-year-olds in 1991 when India?s economic reforms were introduced, have only known their parents? open pockets. The economy had started booming then, foreign companies came seeking Indian talent to solve problems like Y2K, new jobs opened up, salaries saw an upturn, and foreign goods became freely available giving everyone ample purchase choice. People started to spend on unfulfilled urges, from having hitherto lived in the closed economy. More importantly, they indulged their children, whose whims and fancies continue to influence all buying decisions made in every home.

From my different work travels around the world, I?ve come to realise of late that the Zap, Compromise (they try to adjust with both sides) and Retro generations are not an exclusive India phenomenon; they exist everywhere, albeit with different parameters. My classification of the 19th century being the mechanical era, electronic technology ruling the 20th century, and 21st century being the digital age is doubly endorsed from watching how the Zap generation operates. Like zapping TV channels, Zappers are most comfortable with change, change and rapid change in every aspect of life. Their text messaging is phonetic, and giving vowels a miss is accepted script today. The above 30s may find it jarring, yet their mentality is to co-opt Zapper trends because clearly, discrete numerical form is ruling this digital century that?s become totally Zap driven.

The establishment and its doctrines do not work anymore today. Take the world of high fashion. Chanel, the French haute couture design house the Coco Chanel founded in 1909, had maintained an elegant, prim and classical tradition up to the 1990s. Chanel?s classic, rectangular shaped perfume container was so coveted that it was impossible to think it could be disturbed. But even Chanel had to bow to the Zap generation. Their recent perfume called Chance broke Chanel?s classicism by having a round bottle with a half naked, funky young girl gracefully showing her beautiful legs. To make the brand contemporary, Chanel radically changed its dresses too. Chanel now stitches jeans for Zap girls to look rowdy and sexy. Levis Strauss had popularised the cowboy logo for the jeans back pocket to sport, now Chanel?s ?CC? logo also adorns back pocket of jeans. From archetypical French haute couture to jeans is indeed a daring step. By doing that Chanel has not reduced its brand value, rather it?s been extended to the youth.

Another fashion example is reputed French designer Christian Dior who started in 1946. His legacy was carried forward by Italian designer Gianfranco Ferr? in Paris in 1989. After Bernard Arnault, Chairman of the luxury conglomerate LVMH acquired Dior, he found Ferre to be too straight laced. So in 1996 he appointed John Galliano, the most eccentric English fashion designer, for Christian Dior. Galliano had demonstrated the ability to redefine existing subcultures to create fashion garments for the younger, funkier set. “My role is to seduce,” he confessed, saying that theatre and femininity inspired him in his creations. He recreated some of Dior’s period clothing for Madonna to wear in the film Evita.

Galliano?s fashion radically shifted Dior?s old classicism. The perfume Miss Dior has been a French classic. From such a gentle perfume, Dior went on to create the provocative Poison, a new departure in perfume. Christian Dior used to be dressed in very classy suits when in the fashion ramp with models, but Galliano came to his first Dior fashion showing a great deal of skin, you could openly see his body and leg in a provocative carnival dress. By doing this, the Dior brand has not lost its value in the world, but has instead connected to the Zap generation, and contemporarized its image for the continuity of the brand.

Critics did question whether Galliano’s maverick reputation would appeal to Dior’s established clientele. The designer shook up the haute couture world, infused energy into an industry that was showing signs of losing sales and customers. In his 1997spring/summer collection, Galliano spun classic Dior themes around exotic African Masai tribal forms to fashion silk evening dresses. He used colorful choker bead necklaces that injected a young image. But the Dior name remained glamorous and refined. Galliano’s collections, complete with historic personalities and forces, have always enchanted or shocked audiences and been of commercial success. These two examples among many show how connecting to Zappers is taken so seriously.

But in India, there?s still a huge distance between industries and their attempt to appeal to the Zap generation. Most connect their products and services to Compromise or Retro generation buyers. They are not sensitive to the fact that the Zap generation has, and will continue to have, a significant influence on their elders. Without this realization and connect to Zappers, Indian brands will become old fashioned and the whole country will be swamped with foreign brands. Developed countries have the capability to co-opt the trend in advance to drive the world. But the Compromise and Retro generations running business in India, either choose to neglect or do not notice the attitude and behavioural aspects of the Zap generation. In spite of their children or grandchildren being Zappers, the Retro generation is highly disconnected from them. But the Zap pressure, their way of living and exposure, is so high that neither the Retro nor the Compromise can ignore it.

Working in the West through almost four decades from 1970s onwards, I among others have meticulously used disruption as a weapon in strategizing for brands, industrial products, retails or in corporate structure design. Industries there welcome the ?fresh? perspective as a point of differentiation, because these disruptive strategies help their cash registers to ring. In India almost two decades have passed since liberalization that brought in gigantic changes to the marketplace. Indian industrial houses first refused to believe that Indian consumers would ever discard their savings mentality. Now that the market has become vibrant, they are in a paralytic situation, wondering how to get back the consumers they lost to foreign brands. But I still don?t see any attempt to apply the disruptive attitude to retain market share that?s escaping to new foreign players. If Indian brands don?t think about using disruption for profitability and sustainability in the face of incoming foreign brands, they may grow in volume but the bottomline will be ruined.

?Shombit Sengupta is an international Creative Business Strategy consultant to top managements. Reach him at http://www.shiningconsulting.com