In recent years, the conversation about burnout has shifted from frontline wellbeing to leadership sustainability. Once seen as a risk of overwork, burnout is now recognised as a structural and moral issue that reaches the top of organisations as powerfully as it touches the bottom. The irony is striking: those most responsible for creating healthy systems are often least supported by them.

Global studies confirm the trend. Deloitte’s 2024 Women at Work report found that 45 per cent of senior women leaders felt consistently burned out, up from 34 per cent in 2022. McKinsey & Company’s State of Organizations 2024 revealed that almost half of executives experience exhaustion, cynicism, or detachment at least once a month. Even the World Health Organization’s classification of burnout as an “occupational phenomenon” (WHO, 2019) emphasises that this is not individual weakness but a systemic condition shaped by workload, fairness, control, and connection.

Burnout among leaders is complex because it is often hidden behind competence. Many continue to deliver results long after their emotional reserves are spent. They operate in a paradox,  trusted to care for others while neglecting their own care. A Deloitte survey (2024) found that 23 per cent of senior executives admit to feeling “consistently drained” but rarely seek support, citing time, privacy, and the expectation of resilience as barriers. The result is quiet depletion: energy narrows, empathy thins, and perspective shrinks until even meaningful work feels mechanical.

Christina Maslach’s research offers a framework to understand and reverse this decline. Her model identifies six areas that predict burnout or engagement: workload, control, reward, community, fairness, and values (Maslach and Leiter, 2016). Each represents a dimension of the relationship between a person and their work. When alignment in these areas is strong, energy and purpose thrive; when misaligned, stress compounds and meaning erodes.

For leaders, the six areas become both diagnostic and developmental. They point to where small, disciplined actions can restore balance, not through grand reinvention, but through daily repair. This series explores each domain through a self-leadership lens: five evidence-based practices per area that can make a visible difference within a week. The aim is simple: to help leaders reduce their own burnout by realigning how they work with who they are.

Ultimately, self-care is not indulgence; it is stewardship. Leaders who restore their own capacity to think clearly, relate humanely, and act with integrity create workplaces where others can do the same. Burnout is not inevitable, but recovery begins only when leaders include themselves in the circle of care they so often extend to everyone else.

Workload – Managing energy and capacity

For many senior leaders, the real challenge is not motivation but capacity. The day begins with the best intentions, yet the agenda quickly fills with meetings, decisions, and messages that leave little space for the work that matters most. Progress becomes measured by how much gets done rather than by what moves the organisation forward. This is the quiet exhaustion of modern leadership, the sense of running at full speed while losing traction.

Workload represents the imbalance between what work demands and the resources available to meet those demands. Gallup’s State of the Global Workplace (2023) found that nearly half of managers describe themselves as “frequently exhausted”. McKinsey (2024) reported that 44 per cent of executives spend more than 60 per cent of their working week in meetings and emails. These are not isolated symptoms; they signal a systemic problem with leadership design. Maslach and Leiter (2016) found that reducing workload mismatch by even ten per cent leads to significant drops in emotional exhaustion and turnover intention.

The issue is not only time, but energy. When recovery time shrinks and focus fragments, judgement suffers. The goal, therefore, is not simply to do less, but to work with greater discernment, aligning attention and effort with what genuinely creates value.

Practices for improving workload

The following five practices are designed to help leaders reclaim capacity and focus. Each can be implemented within a week, offering small but tangible improvements in energy, clarity, and control.

Reflection: Leading from capacity

Burnout rarely announces itself loudly. It arrives in subtle ways, a shorter temper, a shrinking sense of curiosity, a reluctance to reflect. Overload is not a badge of honour; it is feedback that the way you are working no longer matches your capacity.

Working at capacity means leading from intention, not reaction. It means noticing where your energy leaks and where it renews, and designing your days accordingly.

Take ten minutes this week to reflect:

• Which parts of my work genuinely give me energy?

• What have I normalised that quietly drains it?

• Where could I say no this week without harm?

• What one commitment deserves more of my best attention?

Leadership effectiveness is not measured by endurance but by discernment. When you align effort with meaning, you lead with focus, clarity, and resilience, not depletion.

Control – Reclaiming agency and focus

For many leaders, burnout emerges not from overwork alone but from a gradual loss of control over how that work unfolds. Calendars fill with other people’s priorities, inboxes dictate attention, and decisions become reactive rather than deliberate. What begins as leadership through influence can quickly turn into leadership by obligation. Over time, this erosion of agency depletes motivation and identity.

Christina Maslach’s second domain, control, explores the relationship between autonomy and wellbeing. Her research demonstrates that perceived control, the sense of being able to shape one’s environment and choices, is one of the most powerful buffers against burnout. For leaders, control is not about micromanagement or authority; it is about discretion, boundary setting, and influence. When leaders feel stripped of the ability to act intentionally, exhaustion, cynicism, and disengagement follow.

Evidence from multiple studies confirms this connection. Gallup (2023) reported that employees with high autonomy are 43 per cent less likely to experience burnout. The World Health Organization (2023) identifies lack of control as one of the three primary workplace stressors contributing to chronic fatigue and disengagement. Maslach and Leiter (2016) found that even small increases in perceived control significantly reduce emotional exhaustion. For leaders, the challenge is to re-establish agency within complexity rather than resist it.

Practices for improving control

The following five practices help leaders rebuild autonomy, intentionality, and focus, even in demanding environments.

Reflection: Leading through choice

Control in leadership is not about authority or dominance; it is about discernment. It is the ability to act from intention rather than reaction. When leaders reintroduce choice into how they use time, set boundaries, and respond to pressure, they begin to lead themselves as deliberately as they lead others.

Take ten minutes this week to reflect:

• Where do I still have influence that I am not exercising?

• Which decisions am I making reactively rather than intentionally?

• What one boundary, if protected, would restore my sense of agency?

• How might I introduce more pauses between stimulus and response?

Burnout thrives on helplessness. Leadership, when grounded in conscious choice, restores calm, energy, and direction. When control is reclaimed, leaders rediscover that influence was never truly lost. It simply needed to be reasserted, one deliberate act at a time.

Reward – recognition and renewal

For many senior leaders, burnout rarely begins with workload alone. It begins when the work stops feeling meaningful. The long hours, critical decisions, and constant expectations can start to feel invisible. Praise grows scarce the higher one climbs, and gratitude becomes implied rather than spoken. This absence of recognition erodes not only motivation but also identity. When effort no longer connects to appreciation, leaders can lose sight of why they lead at all.

Christina Maslach’s third domain, reward, addresses this imbalance between effort and acknowledgment. Reward in her model extends beyond financial compensation to include psychological and social forms of appreciation. For leaders, this means rebuilding a relationship with value itself: understanding how to recognise one’s own contribution, how to derive satisfaction from progress, and how to replenish the emotional account that leadership continually draws upon.

Research underscores the risk. Gallup (n.d.) found that employees who receive regular recognition are four times more likely to be engaged and 44 per cent less likely to report burnout. Yet only one in three leaders report feeling appreciated for their contributions (Harvard Business Review, 2022). The paradox is clear: the more responsibility a leader carries, the less reinforcement they often receive. Recognition systems are designed to flow upward, not inward, and few leaders have learned to renew themselves from within that gap.

Practices for improving reward

The following five practices are designed to help leaders restore reward as a personal resource. They reconnect recognition, progress, and rest to the experience of leading well, not just working hard.


Reflection: Leading through renewal

Leaders who balance effort with recognition sustain themselves and their teams over time. Reflect for a moment on these questions:

• Where in your week do you notice your own effort and contribution?

• What personal rewards could you introduce that reinforce renewal rather than exhaustion?

• How might you celebrate learning or persistence as much as results?

• What would happen if you treated rest as evidence of responsibility rather than weakness?

Reward is not indulgence. It is a leadership practice that protects meaning, resilience, and capacity. When you acknowledge progress and recovery with intention, you create the emotional sustainability that high performance quietly depends on.

Community – connection and support

Burnout often thrives in silence. For many leaders, isolation creeps in quietly, disguised as professionalism. The higher the role, the fewer peers there are to confide in, and the more difficult it becomes to express uncertainty or fatigue. Over time, the combination of visibility and loneliness drains energy and perspective. As one CEO once put it, “Everyone looks to me for stability, but no one asks how I am doing.”

Christina Maslach’s fourth domain, community, focuses on the quality of connection and support at work. It is not about socialising or team size, but about belonging, the sense that you are part of a trusted network where honesty, perspective, and care are present. When that network weakens, emotional resilience suffers. For leaders, whose roles often involve holding others’ anxieties, maintaining personal connection is not a luxury but a protective factor.

The evidence is clear. The World Health Organization (2023) identifies social connectedness as one of the strongest predictors of psychological wellbeing. A study published by Harvard Business Review (2023) found that executives with strong peer relationships were 45 per cent less likely to report high burnout symptoms. Maslach and Leiter (2016) also observed that leaders who intentionally maintain relational support, mentors, confidants, or peers, show greater emotional balance and sustained engagement over time.

Community restores perspective. It reminds leaders that they are part of something larger than their role.

Practices for improving community

The following five practices help leaders rebuild and protect the networks that buffer against burnout.

Reflection: Leading through connection

Leadership can be lonely, but it need not be isolating. Connection is not about the number of contacts but the depth of relationships that allow truth, vulnerability, and perspective to circulate freely. The quality of your conversations often mirrors the quality of your energy. When dialogue becomes purely functional, fatigue follows.

Take ten minutes this week to reflect:

• Who are the three people I can speak to honestly, without role or agenda?

• What rituals keep my relationships alive, even when work becomes demanding?

• How can I create reciprocal spaces for feedback and shared learning?

• When will I next pause collectively with peers to reflect, not perform?

Community does not happen by accident; it grows through intention. When leaders invest in their circles of trust, connection becomes both a resource and a safeguard. The reminder is simple: resilience is not built in isolation but in relationship.

Fairness – restoring balance and integrity

For many leaders, burnout takes root when they feel that their personal effort and the organisation’s values are out of sync. When rewards seem arbitrary, recognition uneven, or accountability misaligned, frustration deepens. Over time, a quiet moral exhaustion sets in. Leaders begin to feel like they are managing systems that contradict their own sense of justice. This form of burnout is subtle but corrosive because it attacks meaning rather than capacity.

Christina Maslach’s fifth domain, fairness, concerns the degree to which people perceive their work environment as just, equitable, and transparent. For leaders, this extends to how much personal integrity they can preserve while operating in complex or politicised systems. Fairness is not only about how decisions are made but also about whether leaders feel their own contribution, influence, and treatment are proportionate and respected. When that perception breaks down, cynicism grows, and self-trust erodes.

Research supports this. Gallup (2023) found that perceived unfairness is one of the strongest predictors of emotional exhaustion and disengagement. Maslach and Leiter (2016) observed that when leaders experience moral dissonance between their own values and those of their organisation, burnout risk rises sharply. Fairness, therefore, is not simply an external condition but a deeply internal state: a measure of congruence between what one believes, how one acts, and how one is treated.

For leaders seeking to restore fairness, the path begins with self-alignment. The practices that follow help reclaim integrity, reduce frustration, and reintroduce a sense of moral balance in daily work.

Practices for improving fairness

The following five practices help leaders restore fairness from within. They focus on clarifying boundaries, aligning behaviour with values, and creating space to process moral strain before it becomes depletion.

Reflection: Leading with integrity

Fairness begins with self-honesty. When leaders act from congruence between values, choices, and behaviour, they experience less tension and greater peace of mind.

Take ten minutes this week to reflect:

• Where in my work do I still feel tension between what I value and what I do?

• Which boundary or principle most needs protecting this quarter?

• How can I treat myself with the same fairness I expect from others?

Integrity is not about perfection; it is about alignment. When fairness lives within the leader, burnout loses its strongest fuel: the sense of injustice that comes from betraying one’s own standards.

Values – Reconnecting to purpose and meaning

When leaders lose sight of why their work matters, burnout follows quickly. The days remain full, the meetings continue, the targets are met, but a quiet emptiness takes hold. This is not laziness or loss of ambition; it is the depletion that comes when purpose fades beneath obligation. Leaders who once felt driven by conviction can find themselves performing competence instead of embodying meaning.

Christina Maslach’s sixth domain, values, describes the degree of alignment between a person’s personal principles and the organisation’s practices. When those two diverge, the result is moral distress and disengagement. Values are the fuel of energy and coherence. They remind leaders that their work is not just about what they do but about what they stand for. When that connection breaks, even small decisions start to feel heavy.

Maslach and Leiter (2016) found that value conflict is one of the most reliable predictors of burnout, often more influential than workload. When leaders feel that organisational success requires betraying personal ethics, emotional exhaustion and cynicism follow. McKinsey & Company (2023) report that purpose-aligned leaders are 54 per cent more likely to feel resilient under pressure. Reconnection with values, therefore, is not philosophical reflection; it is an act of energy management.

Restoring meaning begins by noticing where alignment has drifted and by rebuilding small daily practices that reconnect action to purpose.

Practices for improving values alignment

The following five practices help leaders rediscover the link between personal meaning and professional action. They focus on awareness, articulation, renewal, and daily integration of values so that leadership once again feels anchored rather than fragmented.

Reflection: Leading with meaning

Leadership loses vitality when purpose becomes invisible. The work remains, but the why fades. Reconnection begins not with grand missions but with small, conscious acts of alignment.

Take ten minutes this week to reflect:

• Where do my daily actions reflect my deepest values?

• What work or habit feels disconnected from what matters to me?

• What would I change if I led fully from purpose rather than pressure?

When values guide action, burnout loses its foundation. Energy returns because the work once again fits the person doing it.

Restoring balance: leading from alignment

Burnout is not a single event; it is the gradual separation between who we are and how we work. Each of Maslach’s six domains represents a bridge that can either support or strain that connection. When workload outpaces energy, when control fades, when reward feels hollow, when community weakens, when fairness slips, or when values lose meaning, leadership becomes performance without presence.

The repair is not found in grand recovery programmes or resilience slogans but in small, steady acts of alignment. When leaders pay attention to their own balance, they begin to rehumanise leadership itself. They show that care, clarity, and capacity can coexist with ambition.

Rebuilding alignment is both personal and systemic. It begins with leaders asking better questions of themselves before they ask more of others.

Take twenty or so minutes this week to reflect:

• Where am I most aligned today between my effort, influence, and values — and where am I most depleted?

• What pattern in my work quietly signals imbalance that I have normalised?

• If I were to lead from a place of wholeness rather than exhaustion, what one change would I make first?

Leadership sustainability is not about endurance; it is about integration. When leaders reconnect to purpose, boundaries, and fairness, they not only protect their own wellbeing but create the conditions for others to thrive. Recovery is not retreat,  it is the return to leading as a whole human being.

Do you have any tips or advice on reducing your own burnout?

What has worked for you?

Do you have any recommended resources to explore?

Thanks for reading!

References

Amabile, T.M. and Kramer, S.J. (2011) The progress principle: using small wins to ignite joy, engagement, and creativity at work. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.

Berg, J.M., Dutton, J.E. and Wrzesniewski, A. (2023) ‘Job crafting and meaningful work’, Harvard Business Review, 101(2), pp. 78–85.

Cain, L., Goldring, J. and Westall, A. (2024) ‘Seeing behind the curtain: reverse mentoring within the higher education landscape’, Journal of Sociology, 58(4), pp. 587–606.

Center for Creative Leadership (2022) Beating burnout: helping leaders thrive at work. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.

Chartered Management Institute (2023) The everyone economy: why it’s time to act. London: Chartered Management Institute.

De Smet, A., Gagnon, C. and Mygatt, E. (2023) ‘Reclaim your time by limiting collaborative overload’, McKinsey Quarterly. Available at: https://www.mckinsey.com (Accessed: 30 October 2025).

Deane, K.L., Harré, N., Moore, J. and Courtney, M.G.R. (2022) ‘The comparative roles of mentor self-efficacy and empathy in mentoring outcomes’, Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 847176.

Deloitte (2024) Women @ work: a global outlook 2024. Available at: https://www.deloitte.com/global/en/issues/work/content/women-at-work-global-outlook.html (Accessed: 30 October 2025).

Emmons, R.A. and King, L.A. (2019) ‘Personal goals and psychological wellbeing: linking meaning, self-concordance, and motivation’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(2), pp. 285–302.

Gallup (no date) Employee recognition: low cost, high impact. Washington, DC: Gallup Press. Available at: https://www.gallup.com/workplace (Accessed: 30 October 2025).

Gallup (2023) State of the global workplace 2023 report. Washington, DC: Gallup Press. Available at: https://www.gallup.com/workplace/349484/state-of-the-global-workplace.aspx (Accessed: 30 October 2025).

Hannah, S.T., Avolio, B.J. and May, D.R. (2011) ‘Moral maturation and moral conation: a capacity approach to explaining moral thought and action’, Academy of Management Review, 36(4), pp. 663–685.

Harvard Business Review (2019) ‘The power of appreciation’, Harvard Business Review, 17 July. Available at: https://hbr.org (Accessed: 30 October 2025).

Harvard Business Review (2022) ‘How to give and receive meaningful recognition at work’, Harvard Business Review, 6 May. Available at: https://hbr.org (Accessed: 30 October 2025).

Holt-Lunstad, J. (2024) ‘Social connection as a public health issue: evidence, policy, and action’, Annual Review of Public Health, 45, pp. 193–213.

Mark, G., Gudith, D. and Klocke, U. (2008) ‘The cost of interrupted work: more speed and stress’, Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 107–110. https://doi.org/10.1145/1357054.1357072.

Maslach, C. and Leiter, M.P. (2016) ‘Understanding the burnout experience: recent research and its implications for psychiatry’, World Psychiatry, 15(2), pp. 103–111. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20311.

McKinsey & Company (2023) The state of organizations 2023: ten shifts transforming organizations. New York: McKinsey & Company.

McKinsey & Company (2024) State of organizations 2024: building health, scale, and resilience. New York: McKinsey & Company.

Microsoft (2023) WorkLab: the new performance equation (Work Trend Index special feature). Available at: https://www.microsoft.com/worklab (Accessed: 30 October 2025).

MIT Sloan Management Review (2022) ‘How to build a feedback-driven culture’, MIT Sloan Management Review, 63(4), pp. 48–55.

Neff, K.D. and Germer, C.K. (2018) The mindful self-compassion workbook: a proven way to accept yourself, build inner strength, and thrive. New York: Guilford Press.

Porter, M.E. (1996) ‘What is strategy?’, Harvard Business Review, 74(6), pp. 61–78.

PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) (2022) Putting purpose to work: a study of purpose in the workplace. London: PricewaterhouseCoopers.

Reynolds, S.J., Tonks, A. and MacLean, T.L. (2022) ‘Moral stress in leadership: the role of ethical reflection and self-regulation’, Journal of Business Ethics, 180(3), pp. 685–702.

Saunders, E.G. (2020) ‘How to transition between work time and personal time’, Harvard Business Review, 4 June. Available at: https://hbr.org/2020/06/how-to-transition-between-work-time-and-personal-time (Accessed: 30 October 2025).

Siegrist, J. and Li, J. (2017) ‘Work stress and altered biomarkers: a synthesis of findings based on the effort–reward imbalance model’, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(11), 1373.

Tang, Y.Y., Hölzel, B.K. and Posner, M.I. (2022) ‘Neuroscience of mindfulness meditation: how the body and mind benefit’, Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 23(5), pp. 295–305. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-022-00610-0.

University of Cambridge (2022) Leadership and influence: how sense of agency shapes resilience. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Judge Business School. Available at: https://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk (Accessed: 30 October 2025).

University of Warwick (2023) Influence and motivation in modern leadership. Coventry: University of Warwick Business School. Available at: https://warwick.ac.uk (Accessed: 30 October 2025).

van Zyl, L.E., Stander, M.W. and Rothmann, S. (2021) ‘The role of meaning and values in leadership wellbeing and performance’, Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 652892.

World Health Organization (2019) ‘Burn-out an “occupational phenomenon”: International Classification of Diseases’, WHO Newsroom, 28 May. Available at: https://www.who.int/news/item/28-05-2019-burn-out-an-occupational-phenomenon-international-classification-of-diseases (Accessed: 30 October 2025).

World Health Organization (2023) Workplace mental health: policy brief. Geneva: World Health Organization.

World Health Organization (2023) Workplace stress: a collective challenge. Geneva: World Health Organization. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/workplace-stress-a-collective-challenge (Accessed: 30 October 2025).

Zucker, R. (2021) ‘Set boundaries to protect your time and energy’, Harvard Business Review, 8 November. Available at: https://hbr.org/2021/11/set-boundaries-to-protect-your-time-and-energy (Accessed: 30 October 2025).