There is a stubborn, quietly competent cohort walking through towns and parks across the United Kingdom who do not respond to endless pep talks. They were born in the 1960s and 1970s and one thing is obvious when you watch them in a supermarket or at a school gate. They do not require constant motivation the way online forums and corporate slideshows assume people do. This is not a claim about superiority or a sneer at modern struggles. It is an observation that deserves attention and explanation.
Older scaffolding of habit not hype
Many people of this generation grew up with systems, rituals and expectations that rewarded showing up over showing off. That difference matters. When your mother expected you to be home by tea time and your first job insisted on a punctuality culture your internal wiring learned to rely on structure rather than bursts of inspiration. Habit folded into identity more quietly than any viral video could.
Practical continuity beats motivational theatre
In my experience the 60s and 70s cohort is less impressed by motivational theatre and more responsive to practical continuity. Give them a routine that respects their time and offers a tangible result and they will deliver. No glittery mantra required. The irony is that modern productivity culture treats motivation as a renewable resource to be rationed and policed. For people who already have a scaffold of responsibility the key is not to motivate it but to unburden it from needless friction.
Resilience that looks unflashy
Resilience in this context is not a dramatic comeback story. It is the quiet, ordinary persistence of paying the bill on time, fixing a thing properly rather than patching it, and continuing modest investments of effort year after year. That kind of resilience does not react well to constant external exhortation because it interprets it as performative or irrelevant.
Grit may not be sufficient for success but it sure is necessary.
Angela Duckworth Professor of Psychology University of Pennsylvania.
That line from Angela Duckworth captures a useful point without romanticising pain. The people I am describing did not invent grit but they lived in conditions where endurance and small scale competence mattered. Duckworth is careful to say grit alone is not enough. My point is narrower. This generation rarely needs to be rallied into action because their motivation is embedded in practical obligations and cumulative practice.
Work ethic and irritations
Work ethic here is messy and human. There are grudges about management, confusion about technology, and sometimes plain fatigue. Yet those things coexist with the habit of finishing a task regardless. I have sat with men and women who will complain for fifteen minutes about a scheme and then quietly make a phone call that sorts it out. Criticism does not equal passivity. The apparently unmoved often carry a private ledger of commitments they intend to honour.
Motivation as a marketing product
One oddity of contemporary life is that motivation itself has been monetised. We have influencers who sell the feeling of being motivated like a consumable. That model assumes scarcity of inner drive and it benefits from that assumption. But if you were schooled in thrift and delayed reward you may see the whole industry as a redundancy. It is possible to regard daily motivation prompts with the same scepticism you would reserve for a fad diet.
Confidence versus complacency
Do people born in the 60s and 70s ever get stuck by inertia? Of course. Some become defensive about change. Others adopt a weary passivity born of repeated institutional disappointments. Still, the line between confidence and complacency is more nuanced than motivational pundits allow. Confidence here is usually earned through repeated problem solving rather than branded as self esteem boosted by daily affirmations.
Technology and attention spans
This generation navigated the arrival of mass technology in a way younger cohorts did not. They learned to compartmentalise analogue responsibilities with an emerging digital life. That has a curious effect. They do not expect every task to be dopamine engineered. They are comfortable with low stimulation and can sustain attention when needed. Call it old fashioned focus but it produces fewer peaks and crashes compared with lifestyles optimised for attention capture.
Why advice to ‘find your why’ often rings hollow
Motivational culture loves the phrase find your why. For a person who grew up when obligations were simply what you did that advice is abstract and sometimes corrosive. Purpose for them can be small and specific rather than epochal. Purpose might be the maintenance of a garden, the regularity of a family routine, the pride in a trade executed well. It is less dramatic and often more durable.
Practical implications for managers friends and children
If you work with or love someone from the 60s and 70s do not assume they lack ambition because they resist constant motivation. They may prefer clarity over pep. They appreciate concise expectations and then space to perform. They dislike performative check ins. Give them a clear brief and trust the completion rather than the commentary. That trust is a kind of respect that yields better results than motivational speeches.
A plea to those who run workshops
Design sessions that remove obstacles instead of adding cheer. Replace the thirty minute hype with twenty minutes solving a real bottleneck. Nobody in that demographic needs another talk about mindset. They need systems that recognise the friction of life and reduce it. A practical intervention is better than a pep talk because it respects the time honoured habit of doing the work.
Not nostalgia but recognition
This argument is not a nostalgic defence of the past. The world has changed and younger generations face unprecedented volatility. But recognising that people born in the 60s and 70s often have inner engines that do not need constant topping up helps us design better workplaces and communities. It is not an either or. We should borrow what works from each era rather than assume a single motivational formula fits all.
Small experiments not slogans
If you want a test try a small experiment. Stop the daily motivational emails for a week and replace them with a single quick fix that removes a known pain point. Watch what happens. The result will not always be glorious. Sometimes people will stagnate. But often the relief of less noise and more utility will be palpable.
I do not mean to romanticise. Plenty in this generation have struggled. Plenty still seek meaning and encouragement. The difference is where they look and what they need. Constant motivation often feels like an invasive species. It does not integrate gently into the existing ecology of responsibility. It demands attention rather than earning it.
Conclusion
People born in the 60s and 70s do not universally reject motivation. They simply tend to prefer substance over spectacle. Their rhythm is formed by habit and obligation and by a quieter kind of endurance. That should change how we manage teams how we design interventions and how we hear complaints. Respect the scaffolding that exists and remove the friction rather than trying to replace it with yet another rallying cry.
| Idea | What It Means |
|---|---|
| Embedded routine | Motivation comes from habitual responsibility not constant external prompts. |
| Practical fixes | Removing obstacles works better than additional pep. |
| Low stimulation focus | Comfort with steady attention beats engineered dopamine highs. |
| Respectful management | Clear briefs and trust outperform performative check ins. |
FAQ
Do all people born in the 60s and 70s fit this description?
No. Generational tendencies are not destinies. There is wide diversity within any cohort. Some people from those decades are energised by modern motivational culture and some younger people prefer habit and routine. The article highlights tendencies observed across many settings not immutable truths about every individual.
Is this argument a defence of older workplace practices that might be unfair?
Not at all. The point is selective. Many traditional practices contained unfairness and exclusion. Recognising the value of routine and embedded responsibility does not justify unfair labour or rigid hierarchies. It does suggest that small practical changes to reduce friction can benefit many without resurrecting old injustices.
How should managers apply this insight in a mixed age team?
Balance is the answer. Use clear task design and remove operational obstacles while avoiding one size fits all motivational tactics. Ask team members what they find helpful. Some will want regular feedback others prefer autonomy. The key is to treat motivation as a tool not a mantra and to tailor interventions to real needs.
Does this mean motivational content is useless?
No. Motivational content can inspire and reframe thinking for many people and in certain moments it is precisely what is needed. The critique here is about overreliance on motivational noise as a default. Use motivational content with intent and do not let it replace practical support.
Can younger people learn from this approach?
Certainly. The appetite for instant uplift can be tempered with practices that build durable habits. Young people can experiment with low stimulus tasks and incremental commitments to discover how steady effort accumulates. They should not be asked to adopt old norms uncritically but can borrow useful practices where they fit.
