Managed Security Services: CISO Does Not Bear Sole Liability
Benedikt Langer
8 min. read In many organisations, the CISO is seen as the person who stands accountable for security. ...
Read Article
8 min Reading Time
1,028 CEOs stepped down from their roles in the first five months of 2025 – 19 percent more than in the same period in 2024. The highest number ever recorded. At the same time, 56 percent of executives report burnout symptoms. 26 percent of top managers show signs of clinical depression. These are not personal issues. They are corporate risks. When the CEO collapses, strategy collapses.
TL;DR
- 56% of executives report burnout: Higher than in any other professional group. According to Deloitte, 82% of executives have experienced exhaustion symptoms.
- 1,028 CEO departures in 5 months (2025): A 19% increase year-on-year – the highest figure ever recorded. Burnout is a key driver alongside regular turnover.
- 26% depression prevalence among executives: Per the Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, executives are more affected than the general population (18%).
- Cognitive overload as the new primary driver: Deloitte’s 2025 research identifies mental fatigue, decision friction, and constant context switching as the leading burnout indicators – surpassing sheer workload volume for the first time.
- $322 billion in annual global costs due to burnout-related turnover and productivity losses.
Why CEOs Are More Vulnerable Than Their Teams
The loneliness at the top is no cliché. CEOs and board members make decisions they cannot fully discuss with anyone inside the company. Restructurings, layoffs, strategic pivots – each generates cognitive and emotional load that simply cannot be delegated.
Compounding this is the “always-on” culture. Executives in DACH-region companies spend an average of 55-60 hours per week in work mode – not because they’re inefficient, but because expectations from supervisory boards, investors, and stakeholders are boundless. The Gallup Global Workplace Report 2025 shows: Managers influence up to 70 percent of the variance in team engagement and well-being. But who safeguards the manager’s well-being?
Deloitte’s Human Capital Trends Report 2025 delivers a sobering answer: 40 percent of managers say their mental health has deteriorated since assuming leadership roles. The system is systematically producing exhausted leaders.
Source: Deloitte Workplace Burnout Survey, 2025
The New Burnout: Cognitive Overload, Not Just Overtime
Deloitte’s Workforce Intelligence Report 2025 marks a turning point: Mental fatigue, cognitive load, and decision friction have, for the first time, overtaken raw workload volume as the leading burnout indicators. This is a fundamental shift.
What does it mean in practice? A CEO working just 50 hours per week can still burn out – if every hour involves rapid context switching between strategic decisions, operational crises, and stakeholder management. Task fragmentation taxes the brain more severely than sheer duration.
The irony? The very digital transformation meant to boost efficiency adds complexity for leaders. More tools, more channels, more data, more decision points. The AI hype intensifies it: Boards must evaluate AI strategy, interpret regulation, and steer organizational change – all while daily operations continue uninterrupted.
“Mental fatigue, cognitive load, and decision friction are now the leading burnout indicators – and have, for the first time, surpassed raw workload volume.”
Deloitte Workforce Intelligence Report, 2025
Burnout as Corporate Risk: What Supervisory Boards Must Understand
A CEO suffering from burnout makes poorer decisions. This isn’t opinion – it’s neuroscience. Chronic stress reduces activity in the prefrontal cortex, the brain region responsible for strategic thinking, impulse control, and complex decision-making. Simultaneously, activity surges in the amygdala – the center for fear and fight-or-flight responses.
For companies, this means: An exhausted CEO leans toward risk-averse choices, delays strategic execution, and resorts to micromanagement-style control. Exactly the opposite of what’s needed during transformation. The 1,028 CEO departures in five months of 2025 reveal a stark truth: Many choose exit before the system breaks them.
Financial damage is substantial. Burnout costs the global economy $322 billion annually in turnover and lost productivity. At the board level, costs multiply: An unexpected CEO transition destabilizes strategy and culture; finding a successor takes an average of six to nine months.
Five Warning Signs Supervisory Boards Must Recognize
1. Decision delay. Strategic decisions are postponed; meetings run longer without yielding outcomes. The CEO needs more time for decisions that used to come quickly.
2. Micromanagement. The CEO intervenes in operational details that should be delegated. A classic stress symptom: Controlling small things offers security when big questions feel overwhelming.
3. Withdrawal from networks. Reduced presence at industry events, investor meetings, or stakeholder meetings. Social isolation is an early burnout indicator.
4. Cynicism and negativity. Leaders once known for optimism increasingly frame opportunities as problems. Every new initiative becomes a hurdle – not a chance.
5. Physical warning signs. Sleep disturbances, frequent sick days, visible exhaustion. The body signals what the mind still ignores.
What Companies Can Do – Concretely
1. Supervisory board as a well-being steward. Boards must actively monitor executive mental health – not as surveillance, but as care. Regular conversations about pressure, resource needs, and personal boundaries. In Scandinavia, this is already standard practice.
2. Executive coaching and peer groups. CEOs need safe spaces to speak openly about strain. Executive coaches and CEO peer groups (YPO, EO, Vistage) provide exactly that: confidential reflection without status loss.
3. Systematically reduce decision load. Not every decision requires CEO input. Data-driven decision processes with clear delegation rules relieve leadership. A decision framework defines which choices reach the board – and which belong at department-head level.
4. Limit digital overload. Board-level communication guidelines: No emails after 8 p.m., maximum two platform tools in use simultaneously, calendar blocks for focused work. Sounds trivial – but measurably cuts cognitive overload.
5. Succession planning as relief. A CEO who knows a robust succession plan exists can let go. Without one, many CEOs feel irreplaceable – raising pressure and delaying exit.
Conclusion
CEO burnout is not a soft HR topic. It is a top-tier corporate risk. 56% of executives are affected. 1,028 CEOs stepped down in five months. $322 billion is lost annually. Cognitive overload driven by digitalization, AI transformation, and regulatory complexity makes the situation more acute in 2026 than ever before. Supervisory boards must act – not out of compassion, but risk management. An exhausted CEO costs more than any transformation he or she can no longer lead.
Frequently Asked Questions
How common is CEO burnout?
56% of executives report burnout symptoms (2025). Per Deloitte, 82% of executives have experienced exhaustion at least once. 26% show symptoms of clinical depression – well above the general population’s 18%.
Is burnout grounds for CEO dismissal?
Increasingly, yes. The record 1,028 CEO departures in the first five months of 2025 show more top executives are pulling the plug. While rarely cited publicly as the official reason, analysts identify burnout as a key driver – alongside strategic disagreements and board conflicts.
What does CEO burnout cost the company?
Burnout costs the global economy $322 billion annually. At CEO level, costs compound: An unplanned leadership change destabilizes strategy and culture; finding a successor takes six to nine months; onboarding adds another six to twelve months. Estimated total cost of an involuntary CEO transition: 1.5x to 3x annual compensation.
Why don’t CEOs talk about burnout?
Stigma and role expectations. CEOs are expected to be resilient, decisive, and tireless. Admitting burnout is interpreted as weakness – not as a systemic issue. This fuels a vicious cycle: Those who stay silent receive no support. Executive peer groups and confidential coaching offer protected space.
What can the supervisory board do – concretely?
Five actions: Establish regular well-being conversations with the board. Introduce executive coaching as a standard benefit. Promote decision delegation via clear frameworks. Define digital communication guidelines for leadership. Advance succession planning as a relief tool – not a threat.
Further Reading
Boardroom Generational Shift: 545,000 Successors Sought
Data Culture in the Boardroom: 78% Fail on the Human Factor
Mid-Market Digitalization 2026: The Honest Status Report
More from the MBF Media Network
MyBusinessFuture: Staff Shortages in Hospitality – Why Employer Branding Is the Underrated Lever
cloudmagazin: Platform Engineering 2026
SecurityToday: Deepfake Fraud in the Enterprise
Header Image Source: Pexels / Andrea Piacquadio (px:3778964)