Connect with us

Business

Gen Z is adopting ‘career minimalism,’ killing off the ladder for a ‘lily pad’ mentality, Glassdoor says

Published

on



Gen Z is changing the rules of work—and the results are redefining what professional success looks like in 2025. According to a new Glassdoor report, “career minimalism” is at the heart of this shift: younger workers see their jobs as a means to financial stability, saving real passion and ambition for hours off the clock and increasingly lucrative side hustles.

Forget the corner office. Glassdoor’s latest survey, canvassing more than 1,000 professionals in the U.S., revealed that the younger cohort of workers is skeptical of the concept of management. A striking 68% of Gen Z respondents said they wouldn’t pursue management if it weren’t for paycheck or title. To be sure, more money and a higher title have always been powerful draws for workers to go into management, but this still signals a rejection of the traditional corporate climb favored by boomers and millennials and a sentiment that management is seen as something of a poisoned chalice. Gen Z, after all, is the generation that brought the concepts of “quiet quitting” and “conscious unbossing” into the zeitgeist.

“We’ve traded the rigid career ladder for the career lily pad,” said Morgan Sanner, Glassdoor’s Gen Z career expert and founder of Resume Official, calling it “a path where we can jump to whatever opportunity fits best at the moment. In the long run, that kind of flexibility is more sustainable, more realistic, and better suited to today’s workplace realities.”

Gen Z isn’t actually avoiding management

The survey, however, is somewhat at odds with other data collected by Glassdoor. Daniel Zhao, chief economist for the company, told Fortune in a late July interview that Glassdoor’s biannual Worklife Trends report had found Gen Z to be entering the ranks of management at the same rates that millennials and other generations did.

Zhao referenced the idea of “conscious unbossing” and younger generations eschewing management because they don’t view it as a good path anymore, adding “you don’t really see any evidence of that” in the data. The report, which found that millennials had become the majority of managers for the first time ever, also found Gen Z accounting for roughly 10% of managers. “Management is not for everybody and that’s okay,” Zhao told Fortune in late July, “but it is still seen as the best path for climbing the career ladder.”

Zhao told Fortune in a more recent interview that it’s important not to generalize about whole generations or cohorts of people, but at the same time, “many younger workers and Gen Z feel like the job market isn’t working for them so some of these more traditional paths to success feel like they aren’t open in the same way that they might’ve been 10 to 20 years ago.” 

What the new survey suggests, however, is that management is now overwhelmingly seen as a career-ladder move, not something intrinsically good in its own right. This tallies with other surveys of Gen Z from two members of the Big 4 consulting firms. EY found that Gen Z is notably “pragmatic,” and they approach life’s traditional milestones with a kind of “reasoned skepticism.”

KPMG, meanwhile, surveyed its own Gen Z employees on attitudes to work, and found that they are hungry for mentorship and welcome in-office collaboration yet also desire the death of the 9-to-5 mentality and embrace flexibility. Overall, they have a bit of a “show me” mentality, Derek Thomas, national partner-in-charge of university talent acquisition, told Fortune. It amounts to: “Okay, you’re telling me it’s going to be good for me, but is it really?”

‘A true side hustle generation’

If Gen Z isn’t less ambitious but also isn’t thrilled about corporate management, where’s that energy going? The report cited Harris Poll findings that 57% of Gen Z currently have a side hustle compared to 48% of Millennials, 31% of Gen X-ers, and 21% of Boomers and said Gen Z is a “true side hustle generation where work identity lives outside of traditional employment.”

Side hustles aren’t viewed as distractions or fallback options; they are central to Gen Z’s identity, offering creative, entrepreneurial, or activist outlets that main jobs cannot supply. For many, the “day job” simply finances the “passion project”—as one Glassdoor community member, an Iowa high school teacher, put it, “I always joke that I don’t dream of labor … If people were truly passionate about their job, it wouldn’t pay anything. Passion is for your 5-9 after the 9-5.”

A research analyst offered that “While having a job that you’re passionate about is really cool, it’s important to have other interests that are not tied to your work life.”

And what kind of side hustles does Gen Z actually want? The Glassdoor report doesn’t dive into that per se, but FlexJobs tackled the topic in January, finding that nurse practitioner was most the top remote side hustle for 2024, pulling down $56 an hour. Another popular side hustles is therapist, making roughly $30 an hour. In the $20-per-hour range were translator ($24/hour), accountant ($23/hour), content writer ($22/hour), and graphic designer ($20/hour). Remote work listings are very popular, as evidenced by 2024 data from LinkedIn, which found that only 10% of open job positions were remote as of December 2023, but they received 46% of all applications.

Management looks different from a Gen Z perspective

When Gen Zers do move into management, Glassdoor finds that they’re rewriting the traditional playbook. Work-life balance is a non-negotiable, not a perk: 58% reportedly dial down work in the summer, compared to 39% of older peers, while 31% expect flexible hours from Gen Z managers.

“Gen Z is reconsidering what it means to be successful at work in this moment,” Zhao said in the report. He added that “They’re not rejecting ambition — they’re redirecting it toward sustainable career paths that prioritize both financial security and personal fulfillment.”

In conversation with Fortune, Zhao said there is ample evidence of workers feeling anxious, overworked and burned out. “This is not because of laziness,” he said. What the data suggests, he added, is that Gen Z is making a rational turn away from a job market that hasn’t treated them well. “It’s not because people aren’t capable. it’s because in this current moment, many workers feel like they aren’t being rewarded for the level of effort and performance that they’re putting out there.”

While critics accuse Gen Z of laziness or entitlement, Glassdoor’s findings paint a more nuanced picture. Gen Z is setting boundaries, diversifying their professional portfolios, and putting mental health ahead of relentless advancement. They view AI as both a pathway and a potential threat, adapting to rapid disruption with agility and skepticism.

The Glassdoor report suggests that older generations have more than a few things to learn from Gen Z and this trend toward “career minimalism,” writing that it “isn’t about doing less work. It’s about being strategic about where you invest your energy.” In other words, this could be a preview of the future for everyone.

The Future of Work

Gen Z’s approach offers a new answer to the question: “What if there’s a better way?” Their formula is simple: stable jobs for security, side hustles for passion, and strict boundaries for sustainability. Professional success no longer demands that work eclipse every other aspect of life.

As the workplace continues to change, the rise of career minimalism—fueled by Gen Z’s values—will reshape not only how people define success, but how they experience fulfillment. The future of work, it seems, may belong not to the climbers, but to those content to hop from interest to interest with purpose and self-awareness.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Hegseth likens strikes on alleged drug boats to post-9/11 war on terror

Published

on



Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth defended strikes on alleged drug cartel boats during remarks Saturday at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, saying President Donald Trump has the power to take military action “as he sees fit” to defend the nation.

Hegseth dismissed criticism of the strikes, which have killed more than 80 people and now face intense scrutiny over concerns that they violated international law. Saying the strikes are justified to protect Americans, Hegseth likened the fight to the war on terror following the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

“If you’re working for a designated terrorist organization and you bring drugs to this country in a boat, we will find you and we will sink you. Let there be no doubt about it,” Hegseth said during his keynote address at the Reagan National Defense Forum. “President Trump can and will take decisive military action as he sees fit to defend our nation’s interests. Let no country on earth doubt that for a moment.”

The most recent strike brings the death toll of the campaign to at least 87 people. Lawmakers have sought more answers about the attacks and their legal justification, and whether U.S. forces were ordered to launch a follow-up strike following a September attack even after the Pentagon knew of survivors.

Though Hegseth compared the alleged drug smugglers to Al-Qaida terrorists, experts have noted significant differences between the two foes and the efforts to combat them.

Hegseth’s remarks came after the Trump administration released its new national security strategy, one that paints European allies as weak and aims to reassert America’s dominance in the Western Hemisphere.

During the speech, Hegseth also discussed the need to check China’s rise through strength instead of conflict. He repeated Trump’s vow to resume nuclear testing on an equal basis as China and Russia — a goal that has alarmed many nuclear arms experts. China and Russia haven’t conducted explosive tests in decades, though the Kremlin said it would follow the U.S. if Trump restarted tests.

The speech was delivered at the Reagan National Defense Forum at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute in California, an event which brings together top national security experts from around the country. Hegseth used the visit to argue that Trump is Reagan’s “true and rightful heir” when it comes to muscular foreign policy.

By contrast, Hegseth criticized Republican leaders in the years since Reagan for supporting wars in the Middle East and democracy-building efforts that didn’t work. He also blasted those who have argued that climate change poses serious challenges to military readiness.

“The war department will not be distracted by democracy building, interventionism, undefined wars, regime change, climate change, woke moralizing and feckless nation building,” he said.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

US debt crisis: Most likely fix is severe austerity triggered by a fiscal calamity

Published

on



One way or another, U.S. debt will stop expanding unsustainably, but the most likely outcome is also among the most painful, according to Jeffrey Frankel, a Harvard professor and former member of President Bill Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisers.

Publicly held debt is already at 99% of GDP and is on track to hit 107% by 2029, breaking the record set after the end of World War II. Debt service alone is more than $11 billion a week, or 15% of federal spending in the current fiscal year.

In a Project Syndicate op-ed last week, Frankel went down the list of possible debt solutions: faster economic growth, lower interest rates, default, inflation, financial repression, and fiscal austerity. 

While faster growth is the most appealing option, it’s not coming to the rescue due to the shrinking labor force, he said. AI will boost productivity, but not as much as would be needed to rein in U.S. debt.

Frankel also said the previous era of low rates was a historic anomaly that’s not coming back, and default isn’t plausible given already-growing doubts about Treasury bonds as a safe asset, especially after President Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariff shocker.

Relying on inflation to shrink the real value of U.S. debt would be just as bad as a default, and financial repression would require the federal government to essentially force banks to buy bonds with artificially low yields, he explained.

“There is one possibility left: severe fiscal austerity,” Frankel added.

How severe? A sustainable U.S. debt trajectory would entail elimination of nearly all defense spending or almost all non-defense discretionary outlays, he estimated.

For the foreseeable future, Democrats are unlikely to slash top programs, while Republicans are likely to use any fiscal breathing room to push for more tax cuts, Frankel said.

“Eventually, in the unforeseeable future, austerity may be the most likely of the six possible outcomes,” he warned. “Unfortunately, it will probably come only after a severe fiscal crisis. The longer it takes for that reckoning to arrive, the more radical the adjustment will need to be.”

The austerity forecast echoes an earlier note from Oxford Economics, which said the expected insolvency of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds by 2034 will serve as a catalyst for fiscal reform.

In Oxford’s view, lawmakers will seek to prevent a fiscal crisis in the form of a precipitous drop in demand for Treasury bonds, sending rates soaring.

But that’s only after lawmakers try to take the more politically expedient path by allowing Social Security and Medicare to tap general revenue that funds other parts of the federal government.

“However, unfavorable fiscal news of this sort could trigger a negative reaction in the US bond market, which would view this as a capitulation on one of the last major political openings for reforms,” Bernard Yaros, lead U.S. economist at Oxford Economics, wrote. “A sharp upward repricing of the term premium for longer-dated bonds could force Congress back into a reform mindset.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

The $124 trillion Great Wealth Transfer is intensifying as inheritance jumps to a new record

Published

on



Nearly $300 billion was inherited this year as the Great Wealth Transfer picks up speed, showering family members with immense windfalls.

According to the latest UBS Billionaire Ambitions Report, 91 heirs inherited a record-high $297.8 billion in 2025, up 36% from a year ago despite fewer inheritors.

“These heirs are proof of a multi-year wealth transfer that’s intensifying,” Benjamin Cavalli, head of Strategic Clients & Global Connectivity at UBS Global Wealth Management, said in the report.

Western Europe led the way with 48 individuals inheriting $149.5 billion. That includes 15 members of two “German pharmaceutical families,” with the youngest just 19 years old and the oldest at 94.

Meanwhile, 18 heirs in North America got $86.5 billion, and 11 in South East Asia received $24.7 billion, UBS said.

This year’s wealth transfer lifted the number of multi-generational billionaires to 860, who have total assets of $4.7 trillion, up from 805 with $4.2 trillion in 2024.

Wealth management firm Cerulli Associates estimated last year that $124 trillion worldwide will be handed over through 2048, dubbing it the Great Wealth Transfer. More than half of that amount will come from high-net-worth and ultra-high-net-worth people.

Among billionaires, UBS expects they will likely transfer about $6.9 trillion by 2040, with at least $5.9 trillion of that being passed to children, either directly or indirectly.

While the Great Wealth Transfer appears to be accelerating, it may not turn into a sudden flood. Tim Gerend, CEO of financial planning giant Northwestern Mutual, told Fortune’s Amanda Gerut recently that it will unfold more gradually and with greater complexity

“I think the wealth transfer isn’t going to be just a big bang,” he said. “It’s not like, we just passed peak age 65 and now all the money is going to move.”

Of course, millennials and Gen Zers with rich relatives aren’t the only ones who sat to reap billions. More entrepreneurs also joined the ranks of the super rich.

In 2025, 196 self-made billionaires were newly minted with total wealth of $386.5 billion. That trails only the record year of 2021 and is up from last year, which saw 161 self-made individuals with assets of $305.6 billion.

But despite the hype over the AI boom and startups with astronomical valuations, some of the new U.S. billionaires come from a range of industries.

UBS highlighted Ben Lamm, cofounder of genetics and bioscience company Colossal; Michael Dorrell, cofounder and CEO of infrastructure investment firm Stonepeak; as well as Bob Pender and Mike Sabel, cofounders of LNG exporter Venture Global.

“A fresh generation of billionaires is steadily emerging,” UBS said. “In a highly uncertain time for geopolitics and economics, entrepreneurs are innovating at scale across a range of sectors and markets.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.