Here’s what Ogilvy’s new Gen Z research tells us about how brands can actually connect with us

Gen Z has become one of marketing’s favourite contradictions.

We want to get excited over new digital experiences, but we’re tired of being online. We care about individuality, but we want to belong. We want financial stability, but we still want to enjoy life. We use AI, but we’re increasingly experiencing “burn out” with how technology is changing the way we work, live and connect.

But after reading Ogilvy’s latest Gen Z research, I don’t think we’re contradictory at all.

We’re selective.

And as a Gen Z myself, almost every finding felt strangely familiar. It didn’t feel like another report trying to tell brands what Gen Z looks like. It felt like someone had actually paid attention to why we behave the way we do.

When looking for stability gets mistaken for chasing status.

One of the findings that stood out to me was the shift in what Gen Z considers an ambitious life.

Ogilvy found that Gen Z’s ambitions are moving away from traditional status signals and towards things that feel much more personal: protecting mental health, building stability, maintaining financial security, enjoying life where possible and becoming people we’re proud of being.

That doesn’t mean Gen Z isn’t ambitious.

It means we’re redefining what a successful life looks like.

And I think this affects much more than how we buy products. It affects the relationships we build, the spaces we spend time in and the brands we choose to let into our lives.

We’re increasingly looking for things that can fit into a life we can actually maintain.

We’re not that hyper-independent. Sometimes we just want the final say.

Ogilvy’s research also challenges the idea that Gen Z is completely independent and doesn’t want guidance.

Only around 7% say they rarely seek guidance when making important life decisions.

Around 40% want input from others but still insist on making the final decision, while another 40% are comfortable following guidance from a trusted source.

The interesting part is what kind of guidance we want.

Gen Z’s biggest ask isn’t necessarily:

“Tell me what to do.”

It’s:

“Tell me I’m not missing something.”

We want another perspective, enough information to make an informed decision and someone we trust to challenge or reassure us, without taking the decision away from us.

Even the gender differences in the research are interesting. Women were significantly more likely to look for validation that their instincts were right (50% compared with 30% of men), while men were more likely to want someone to challenge their thinking.

Different needs, but ultimately the same desire:

confidence.

And that extends to our relationships.

I think this is particularly visible in how Gen Z approaches relationships.

We’re not necessarily looking for someone to simply fit into our lives. We’re looking for someone we can build (spar) with, someone who understands the kind of life we’re trying to create.

Peace. Financial stability. A manageable routine. Emotional safety. Someone who adds to that rather than constantly disrupting it.

And that connects directly to another Ogilvy finding: when Gen Z was asked about moments of true belonging, 47% said acceptance and safety came first, ahead of friend groups, school and shared purpose.

That says a lot, because belonging isn’t always about finding your people.

Sometimes it’s simply about finding somewhere — or someone — where you can stop feeling like you have to prove yourself.

From creative communities to run clubs, Gen Zs are more connected than ever. Yet, we crave connection. What’s the gap? 

This might be one of the biggest contradictions brands need to understand.

Only 6% of Gen Z say they’re satisfied with their current level of in-person experience.

At the same time, 63% say digital helps, but in-person connection is essential.

And when asked what makes a real-world experience worth having, in-person connection ranked #1 at 21%, ahead of belonging, shared memories and live events.

So no, Gen Z isn’t abandoning digital.

We’re just recognising that digital connection and human connection aren’t the same thing.

That’s why examples like Madhappy, Pinterest and Partiful are so interesting.

Madhappy built its Local Optimist Space around shared experiences and coffee conversations rather than making the transaction the entire point of the store.

Pinterest turned digital search behaviour into real-world experiences, even encouraging people to put their phones away and actually experience the moment.

And Partiful transformed the invitation from a logistical necessity into the beginning of the social experience itself.

The common thread?

Technology isn’t trying to replace the human experience. It’s helping create one.

And then there’s AI.

This is where I think brands need to be particularly careful.

For a generation constantly exposed to and cannot help experiment with AI, Gen Z is probably one of the generations to express their discomfort with AI. Because they know that knowing a technology like the back of your hand doesn’t automatically mean we want it to replace everything human.

In fact, 25% of US Gen Z don’t use AI tools at all — twice the rate in the UK.

And the bigger question isn’t simply whether we’re using AI.

It’s whether using AI is changing how connected we feel to other people.

We’ve grown up with an extraordinary amount of information constantly available to us. We can research a product in seconds, see hundreds of opinions, compare our lives with people around the world and now generate content with almost no friction.

That exposure has made us more aware of our environments, our choices and increasingly, the impact technology has on the world around us.

So as AI makes it easier for brands to produce more content, more personalisation and more interactions at scale, the brands that stand out may actually be the ones that know when not to automate the human part.

Because another AI-generated message doesn’t necessarily mean connection.

Sometimes, connection is simply feeling understood.

The brands getting Gen Z right aren’t necessarily talking to us. They’re building with us.

Look at Depop.

Sellers create their own shops, invent their own categories and essentially become the tastemakers. Depop then follows those community signals, turning aesthetics created by its users into app folders and trend reports.

The result? A 12% lift in brand equity among Gen Z in Q1 2025.

Or Strava.

It didn’t turn exercise into another competition for Gen Z. It became part of the infrastructure behind the run-club movement. The number of clubs on the platform nearly quadrupled in 2025, while organised events grew 50% year over year.

And then there’s POP MART, which turned collecting into something social. The rarity of its figures creates a reason to share, trade, unbox and participate in a community, not simply buy another product. Its revenue more than doubled in 2024.

These brands aren’t just selling products.

They’re creating reasons for people to participate.

So what does Gen Z actually want from brands?

I don’t think we need brands to constantly try to “speak our language.”

We don’t need another campaign using slang found on TikTok.

We don’t need brands trying desperately to look young.

We need brands to pay attention.

We’re part of a generation that’s constantly trying to prove that our work, our routines, our perspectives and our ambitions matter. We’re trying to be heard while often being told we’re inexperienced, distracted or difficult to understand.

So when a brand slows down enough to understand us, it feels different.

As a Gen Z consumer, once I know a brand actually sees me, understands my pain points, welcomes me in and doesn’t reduce me to a demographic profile, I’m much more likely to remember it, trust it and eventually become loyal to it.

And maybe that’s the real lesson from Ogilvy’s research.

Gen Z isn’t contradictory. We’re nuanced.

We’re looking for stability and excitement. Independence and guidance. Digital convenience and real-world connection. Individuality and belonging. Technology and humanity.

Those things don’t cancel each other out.

They’re what being Gen Z looks like.

For brands, the opportunity isn’t to figure out which side of the contradiction we’re on.

It’s to understand why we need both.

Because the brands that take the time to understand the person behind the demographic won’t just market to Gen Z.

They’ll give us a reason to stay.

Source: Ogilvy, Gen Z Pulse: Designed for Contradiction. Brand examples and statistics referenced from the research.