The Generational Conflict – Challenges and Potentials

This topic is relevant as it reflects the different values, attitudes and life realities of different age groups, which can lead to misunderstandings and tensions in families, at work and in society. From an intercultural perspective, perceptions and expressions of intergenerational conflict vary greatly as cultural norms and traditions shape expectations and relationships between generations, leading to different conflict dynamics and approaches to resolution. Understanding these differences can help to build bridges and promote dialogue between the generations.

Against this backdrop, 15 KAAD scholars met in virtual space on 19 March 2025 under the moderation of Markus Leimbach, Head of the Eastern Europe Department, to discuss the topic ‘The generational conflict – challenges and potentials’ as part of a one-day seminar.

Fr Professor Ulrich Engel OP, one of KAAD's two spiritual advisors, introduced the topic with a spiritual impulse. Using several examples from the New Testament, he pointed out the generational conflicts already mentioned in the Bible.

In his lecture, Professor Gergely Rosta, a sociologist at the University of Münster, defined the concept of generational conflict, which emerged in the 1960s and refers to the conflict between different generations that is often characterised by prejudices against the other generation. Using two quotations from the Sumerians (3000 BC) and the Babylonians (1000 BC), he showed that these conflicts have a long tradition. He then went on to define the current generations of the ‘Silent Generation’, the ‘Baby Boomers’, ‘Generation X’, the ‘Millennials (or Generation Y)’ and ‘Generation Z’ in terms of the values represented, the character of the generation, the prevailing work ethic, the technologies used and how communication takes place.  He used these points to demonstrate the different approaches and behaviours of the generations. It is not only the term ‘work-life balance’ that is defined and understood differently. The rapid development in the digital sector also leads to different ways of thinking, living and working. While generations Y (‘millennials’) and Z were born into the digital age as so-called ‘digital natives’, the ‘digital immigrants’, i.e. the baby boomer generation and generation X, did not grow up with the internet, smartphones or other digital technologies.

Gergely Rosta made it clear that the definitions relate to the American and Western European context and that important development events and historical events, such as the end of colonial rule, wars, famines and political events, must be included in the definitions for other country contexts.

However, in an interactive survey among the participants, they were able to categorise themselves as belonging to the respective generations, even though they come from different country contexts. The option ‘cannot categorise’ was not selected.

Naturally, there are discussions and arguments about views and values between the generations, each forming their own identity and expressing the essence of their time in specific forms of culture, art and innovation. This became particularly clear in a participant presentation on Kenya, which emphasised the younger generation's detachment from tradition. The participant’s presentation from Iraq and the discussion in the working groups also showed that the younger generations’ ties to tradition are weakening. It became clear that everyone has experience of intergenerational conflicts and feels this in their daily lives, especially in patriarchal, traditional cultures. All groups agreed on solutions for dealing with the generational conflict. The most important thing is respect for one another and respectful communication with one another in order to solve problems together. Learning from each other (in relation to the generations) was emphasised as necessary, but also as not easy. It is also expected that the younger generation will be allowed to take on more responsibility and that the older generation will be more patient.

Overall, it was a very interesting and advanced seminar. The digital framework was judged to be suitable. Some participants pointed out that they would not have been able to take part in a face-to-face seminar due to time constraints and that the digital format was therefore very helpful. This also applied to two participants who were connected from Ukraine and Moldova.