Everyone recognises the trope of the stressed-out senior manager who's always close to breaking point. But, in fact, mid-career is one of the most vulnerable periods for burnout and stress in a worker's life. At this stage, many people have extra responsibilities outside work at the same time as their employer increases expectations around performance, availability and leadership.
Author
- Katie Green
Senior Lecturer in Leadership and Leadership Development, Manchester Metropolitan University
Mid-career is often where this double load increases the risk of burnout . Research has found that these professionals experienced particularly high levels of burnout, worked longer hours and reported lower job satisfaction compared to other age groups. A key driver was the ongoing tension between meeting the demands of their job and maintaining a work-life balance.
Importantly, burnout is now widely recognised not as an individual failing, but as a workplace problem. The condition is characterised by emotional exhaustion, cynicism and lower productivity, with research showing that it is shaped primarily by organisational structures, cultures and leadership practices rather than a worker's weakness or a lack of coping skills.
Burnout does not affect all groups equally. Women, for example, report higher levels of both personal and work-related burnout than men, particularly in mid-career. This could reflect women taking on more of a family's caring responsibilities as well as expectations about availability and emotional labour.
The COVID pandemic intensified these dynamics. Many mid-career professionals had to juggle work and family responsibilities at the same time as their social interactions were curtailed and their workloads and working hours stretched. Since the height of the pandemic, all sectors and roles have seen increases in burnout rates, with health and social care organisations being hit particularly hard.
Absorbing the pressure
Stress and burnout come at a cost to employers through lost working days, absenteeism and "leavism" (people working while on leave). Mid-career professionals are especially exposed because they are often expected to absorb pressure without showing strain. This could be, for instance, leading a team through organisational change at the same time as meeting their own performance targets and supporting junior colleagues.
In many organisations, chronic overload and constant busyness are normalised and even rewarded. Permanent availability becomes a marker of competence rather than a warning sign.
Despite this, there remains an assumption that mid-career professionals are inherently resilient. However, prolonged exposure to high levels of stress can make them less resilient. Experience does not necessarily protect against burnout; in many cases it just conceals it.
Symptoms such as fatigue, insomnia and anxiety are frequently minimised or ignored until stress reaches a breaking point. Those known for their ability to "power through" often suppress warning signs to maintain a professional identity. These workers often delay asking for help, in part because things commonly associated with burnout (long hours, constant responsiveness and chronic overwork, for example) are often normalised.
While short-term stress can sometimes enhance performance, so-called "good stress" sits close to a tipping point. When pressure becomes chronic and recovery time is limited or absent, stress becomes a direct pathway to burnout.
My research looking at line managers' development highlights these risks. Middle leaders and mid-career professionals were consistently described as overloaded and under-trained for their management responsibilities. Many had entered leadership roles with little or no formal preparation, and had to learn how to manage people on the job.
Promotions often brought significant increases in responsibility without corresponding investment in training. And where there were opportunities for development, they were frequently ad hoc and inconsistent. This combination fuelled anxiety and self-doubt - well-established precursors to burnout.
As part of the project , we interviewed more than 150 line managers from both the public and private sectors. Our findings strongly suggest that burnout is shaped by workplace systems, norms and expectations. Organisational practices and processes, along with culture and leadership patterns, play an important role. Unrealistic targets, excessive monitoring and a culture of long hours amplify stress. And leadership practices that prioritise constant performance pressure actively increase burnout risk.
Work climate matters more than hours alone - risk factors include bullying, sexual harassment and toxic leadership styles. Notably, burnout is closely linked to engagement from leaders, or the absence of it. For example, one study found that mid-career professionals, particularly women, suffer burnout when their effort goes unrecognised by managers.
Leaders who listen, acknowledge effort and offer recognition can significantly reduce the risk of burnout. Essentially, feeling that your work matters and is valued makes a measurable difference.
Leaders can design work for sustainability rather than endurance. This includes making sure workloads and targets are realistic, as well as stamping out cultures where constant availability is prized.
Mid-career leadership roles must be properly supported, and workers should be given protected time for training and development rather than being expected to learn through trial and error. Their managers should try to create a safe environment - listening seriously, responding early to concerns and intervening before stress escalates into burnout.
Finally, strong team working and a sense of community at work provide meaning that buffers against burnout. In mid-career, when pressures converge from multiple directions, connection is not a luxury but a necessity. The importance of joy at work is often overlooked. Opportunities to create meaning, connection and enjoyment are not indulgent extras; they protect against chronic stress and burnout.
Katie Green does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
