A quiet revolution is underway in the workplace. As baby boomers retire and millennials move into senior roles, many companies have turned their attention to cultivating Gen Z as the next generation of leaders. But a curious and concerning pattern is emerging: a significant portion of Gen Z professionals are not aspiring to traditional leadership roles at all.
Rather than eagerly stepping onto the leadership ladder, many Gen Z employees are stepping back, questioning the costs of authority, the rigidity of hierarchical structures and the sustainability of career advancement as it has traditionally been defined. This generational shift signals a deeper reckoning with power, purpose and well-being in the workplace—and challenges organizations to evolve their models of leadership accordingly.
Redefining success
Gen Z, born roughly between 1997 and 2012, has come of age in an era of deep disruption. From climate collapse and pandemic lockdowns to racial reckoning and economic volatility, this generation has experienced instability as a norm, not an exception. Against that backdrop, it’s not surprising that many are questioning the dominant definitions of success passed down from previous generations.
For Gen Z, leadership is no longer synonymous with power, prestige or a corner office. Instead, it’s often perceived as a tradeoff, one that may cost too much in terms of mental health, personal freedom and ethical alignment. Studies show that Gen Z places a high premium on well-being, autonomy and values-driven work. In many cases, the sacrifices traditionally required for leadership—long hours, constant availability, stress without support—are simply not worth it.
This isn’t a sign of laziness or lack of ambition, as some headlines suggest. It’s a reframing of ambition itself. Many Gen Z professionals want impact, not just influence. They want to make a difference, but not at the cost of their health or humanity. For them, success must be sustainable—and leadership must be reimagined.
Trust and transparency matter
One key reason Gen Z professionals resist leadership is a lack of trust in existing organizational structures. Having witnessed political polarization, corporate scandals and systemic failures across industries, Gen Z is often skeptical of institutions and wary of performative leadership. Words like “authenticity,” “transparency” and “inclusion” are not just buzzwords to this generation—they’re benchmarks by which leadership is judged.
When leaders fail to embody these values, Gen Z takes notice. And when leadership roles appear to require compromising those values, Gen Z opts out. Many young professionals are asking: Why should I take on a role that requires me to uphold a broken system? Why should I climb a ladder that leads to burnout, bureaucracy or ethical gray zones?
Gen Z’s hesitancy isn’t a rejection of leadership itself—it’s a rejection of a model of leadership that no longer works. The onus is now on organizations to build trust by evolving what leadership looks like and how it is supported.
The burnout backlash
The impact of burnout cannot be underestimated in this conversation. Gen Z is the most anxious, stressed and mentally taxed generation in the workforce. According to a Deloitte Global survey, up to 40 percent of Gen Zers feel stressed all or most of the time. Add in rising living costs, student debt and the pressure to perform in an “always on” culture, and it’s no wonder that the idea of taking on more responsibility feels more like a burden than a breakthrough.
Traditional leadership pipelines often fail to address this reality. Instead of providing mentorship, flexibility and support, many companies expect younger employees to “prove themselves” by overworking—perpetuating the very cycles of exhaustion that Gen Z is trying to escape.
Rather than asking why Gen Z isn’t stepping up, companies might do better to ask why stepping up has to mean burning out. What would it look like to design leadership pathways that prioritize wellbeing, flexibility and collective success over individual sacrifice?
A different kind of leadership
It’s important to recognize that Gen Z isn’t shying away from leadership entirely—they’re redefining it. Many are drawn to flat team structures, shared decision-making and project-based influence rather than hierarchical titles. They want to contribute their ideas, mentor peers, lead initiatives and build communities—but they don’t necessarily want to be “the boss.”
Gen Z is helping usher in a new era of decentralized, distributed leadership—where power is shared, not concentrated; where leadership is a practice, not a position. Organizations that embrace this shift stand to benefit from more engaged, creative and resilient teams.
To support this evolution, companies must rethink leadership development. That means moving beyond legacy programs focused on executive presence or performance metrics and instead investing in emotional intelligence, relational skills, purpose-driven strategy and regenerative work practices. Regenerative practices move past mere sustainability to actively restore and renew people and systems. In the workplace, this might look like designing workflows that reduce burnout, embedding cycles of rest and reflection and cultivating cultures that nourish creativity and connection. It also means recognizing and rewarding leadership in all its forms—not just the visible or vertical ones.
The future of leadership will not look like the past. As Gen Z becomes the largest cohort in the global workforce, their values will continue to shape how work is done—and who is willing to lead. Companies that want to thrive in this new landscape must listen deeply and act boldly. That starts with acknowledging that Gen Z’s reluctance is not a problem to fix but a signal to heed. This generation is calling for a profound cultural shift—one that aligns leadership with integrity, care and collective flourishing.
If we meet that call, we don’t just solve a talent pipeline issue. We co-create a future of work where leadership is more human, more inclusive and more aligned with what truly matters.
