Feature
White Paper
The Future of Leadership Development: AI-Driven Manager Enablement
A CEO paused midway through a talent discussion at a recent leadership meeting to flag something unexpected. Burnout was becoming a serious problem in his organization, and it was concentrated in a surprising demographic: workers in their mid-40s and early 50s, many of them among the organization's most experienced and capable leaders, the exact people expected to move into its most senior roles.
"We are losing momentum at exactly the point we need it most."
That observation comes from Lynda Gratton, a professor of management practice at London Business School, who has spent years studying longevity and its implications for working life. She heard variations of it from multiple executives over recent months and published her findings in Harvard Business Review on May 27.
The explanation might not sound that surprising. People in this demographic are in high-pressure roles with relentless demands, both personally and professionally. Some people end up hitting a wall.
But organizations continue to treat burnout as an individual problem. Someone couldn't sustain the pressure? We’ll move them around or out, the company will absorb the loss, and the work will continue with someone else.
What happens when there is no one else though?
The research argues the cause of this burnout is structural. People in their 40s are suffering as a cohort, and the reason has less to do with individual resilience than with a mismatch between how long careers now last and the assumptions built into the systems designed to support them.
Gratton’s research on longevity suggests people currently in their mid-40s are likely to work into their early to mid-70s. A career that runs 50 or 60 years is a different undertaking than one that runs 30 or 40. The midpoint is now somewhere in the early 40s, and organizations are still treating it as the beginning of the end.
Peak Responsibility, No Room to Recalibrate
To understand what's actually happening, Gratton developed a 10-week research program for 20 mid- and senior-level professionals from three global companies in France, Sweden and the United Kingdom, combining individual diagnostics, structured reflective exercises and peer group conversations.
In diagnostics she has run with this cohort, workers in their 40s consistently score lowest on "calm," her term for the capacity for reflection and reset. Effort and output were fine. Instead, they struggled with the one thing that makes deliberate career choices possible.
Her research maps three phases of a long career.
Workers in their 20s experiment freely, believing they have time to try things, adjust and move sideways. Workers in their 60s become more reflective and deliberate, and new possibilities tend to open up.
In between are workers in the "pivotal 40s." These workers carry peak institutional responsibility and face maximum time pressure, yet are the least able to experiment at exactly the stage when the choices they make will shape the next 30 years of their working lives.
The career architecture most organizations operate on didn't account for any of that. It was built for a shorter working life, one where the 40s really were the home stretch.
At Mid-Career, the Question Shifts From Performance to Identity
While the research focused on executives, the experience isn't confined to the leadership pipeline. Mid-career workers at every level are navigating the same questions, most without organizational support and many without language for what they're actually feeling.
Given structured time to reflect, most participants in the research found that earlier decisions made without much deliberate thought had compounded into the trajectory they were now on.
Alongside that came a shift in what they actually wanted: less focus on output and advancement, more on meaning, balance and making choices that were actually their own. Most felt they couldn't act on any of it.
What emerged underneath all of that was the question of identity. Their concern was no longer how to perform better. It had shifted to whether they were in the right place, how much they should be adapting and what it means to stay who they actually are.
What do I want to become for the next 30 years?
Most organizations never put that question in front of their mid-career employees. Yet this is the point when it matters most and when it's hardest to answer, because the conditions for answering it deliberately have been designed out of the job.
Career Exploration Stops at Entry Level. With AI Changing Roles, That Has to Shift
A lot of useful work has gone into redesigning the career ladder over the past few decades. Skills-based hiring, internal talent marketplaces and more fluid movement between roles all have helped.
Most of it has focused on how organizations deploy talent. Less of it has asked what a sustainable career looks like for the person living it.
Conference
Jun
2
Gartner Application Innovation & Business Solutions Summit Las Vegas 2026
Register
Webinar
Jun
17
Engaged, But Not Convinced: What's Eroding Beneath Your Strongest Engagement Numbers
Perceptyx EX Benchmark '26: leadership trust, change confidence and conviction gap truths at large enterprises.
Register
Webinar
On demand
Retention Is a Communication Problem: New Data from 6,000+ Employees
This session gives leaders a clear diagnosis and practical path to treat retention as an infrastructure problem.
Watch Now
Webinar
On demand
Do Learning Programs Really Work? How to Turn Education Into Engagement In Healthcare
See how leaders are using learning programs to build trust with healthcare professionals and create measurable engagement.
Watch Now
A 45-year-old with 20 years of experience and 25 more years ahead needs an actual plan for what their career could look like. The default most organizations offer is to keep doing the job until something forces a change.
When someone actually does get the conversation, the options aren't exotic:
- Pivoting into something adjacent or new
- Going deeper into what they already know
- Building skills in a different direction without leaving their current function
Most experienced professionals have a sense of which direction they'd go when someone asks. The problem is that the conversation rarely happens. And with AI changing the skills needed, it’s more critical than ever.
Career exploration is part of how we onboard early career workers. Job rotations, trial assignments and stretch projects are designed to expose people to different functions and help them figure out where they fit. We build those tools because someone at the start of a career hasn't had enough experience to know what they want yet.
Then we assume that by the time someone is in their late 30s or early 40s, they're set.
A 43-year-old who has spent 15 years in one function and is facing 25 more years of work hasn't necessarily figured it out any more than a 25-year-old has. They've built expertise in one direction. They may have interests and capabilities they've never had a chance to explore, because organizations stopped making space for it.
Rotations, secondments, structured trials in adjacent areas: the same tools we use for early career workers are just as valuable at 43.
The organizations already doing this find that experienced employees who get the chance to explore and recalibrate tend to stay, and tend to bring more to their roles afterward. The ones that skip it find out what it costs when a high-performing 47-year-old who has been asking the same questions about their professional identity for three years finally finds a different answer on their own.
A Planning Problem, Not a People Problem
The career we designed for workers assumed they'd be done by 65. The research shows that most won't be.
The mid-career years are now an early midpoint of a working life, not the final chapter. Most organizations haven't recalibrated to that reality, which means the people carrying the most institutional knowledge and responsibility are navigating one of the biggest decisions of their working lives without much help from the organizations that depend on them. With AI, that increases the pressure on both understanding their identity and building a career for the next 30 years.
The people in their mid-career years are already making the big decisions, usually alone, under pressure, without much visibility into what their options actually are. The organizations that give them some structure for those decisions will keep them. The ones that don't will keep calling it a retention problem.
Editor's Note: How else should we be rethinking career paths today?
- The Career Survival Guide for 2026: 4 Moves to Make Right Now — When things are uncertain, it's easy to go into maintenance mode. But you'll need to take action to build momentum in your career in 2026.
- Get These Basics of Career Pathing Right. Employee Retention Will Follow — Half of U.S. workers are planning to leave their employers this year. Some tips to avoid being dumped.
- The Career Reinvention Nobody Talks About — Employees are rethinking success, skills and what progress looks like. Is your organization keeping up?