Overload? No thanks — Gen Z would rather leave
Published on 18 September 2026 · 6 min read
By 2030, every third working person will belong to Generation Z — the cohorts born between 1997 and 2012. A new study by Il Sole 24 Ore and WTW shows how clearly this generation is shifting the rules of the game: more than half of the young respondents would leave their company if the workload became permanently unsustainable. This is not a specifically Italian phenomenon. I see the same development in my mandates between Bavaria, Austria and Northern Italy — and it affects production and shift operations just as much as the office.
The numbers: balance before salary
The new Gen Z Intelligence Report is the first continuous survey in Italy specifically focused on Generation Z and its relationship with work. It was produced by Il Sole 24 Ore with 24 ORE Ricerche e Studi, in partnership with WTW and supported by University Box, a community with more than 1.2 million young people. Four reports per year are planned.
The ranking of priorities is clear: work-life balance comes first at 60.4 %. Stability and security follow at 47.6 %, only then salary at 39.6 % and career ambition at 29.8 %. Up to three answers were possible.
Particularly relevant for employers: 52 % of respondents would quit because of unsustainable workload — and almost as many, 54 %, because of a non-competitive salary. The most popular benefit among under-30s is additional free time.
Not a refusal to perform, but a calculation
One can dismiss these numbers as comfort-seeking. I think that is a mistake. The study describes a generation shaped by economic uncertainty and the pandemic — and therefore one that weighs stability more heavily than fast advancement. That is more caution than entitlement.
The second look is decisive: salary alone retains no one, and work-life balance alone does not either. Anyone who wants to retain talent has to think both together — compensation, task and sustainable workload as one package. This is exactly where many companies fail, because HR, the line manager and the management board each turn only one screw.
Why this hits mid-sized companies especially hard
Large corporations can often buffer overload through additional roles, reserve pools or transfers. In the mid-market it is different: when one person drops out, the work is distributed across few shoulders. That is exactly the sustained pressure under which, according to the study, Gen Z leaves — and the resignation makes the problem worse for everyone who stays.
On top of that comes the skills shortage. In regions with very low unemployment — Upper Bavaria, Tyrol, South Tyrol, Trentino — young skilled workers change jobs quickly because they can. Anyone who has to refill a position here pays with time, onboarding effort and often a higher salary.
The study also shows that young people value relationships at work, but prefer small teams where real exchange and personal development are possible. That is actually a strength of the mid-market — if it is consciously designed and not left to chance.
What this means concretely for recruiting and retention
- Communicate workload honestly: In the interview, describe realistically what peak periods look like and how they are absorbed. Anyone who glosses over this loses the person during probation.
- Measure workload, do not guess: Regularly evaluate overtime, cover chains and unfilled positions per team. Sustained overload is an early indicator of turnover.
- Take time seriously as a benefit: Additional days off, predictable shifts or working-time accounts often have a stronger effect for this target group than another non-cash benefit.
- Keep compensation market-aligned: 54 % would leave because of a non-competitive salary. An up-to-date compensation benchmark belongs in the retention strategy — not only in replacement hiring.
- Small teams, clear leadership: Second-level managers are decisive: they see overload first and can catch it early — if they are enabled to do so.
My view from practice
In my search mandates, I now almost always ask candidates why they left their last position. Among younger candidates the answer is strikingly often not “too little money”, but “in the long run it was no longer manageable” — frequently because one position in the team had remained unfilled for months.
Conversely, this means: a vacancy filled quickly and well is not only a recruiting issue. It is a retention measure for the whole team.
Frequently asked questions
How many young employees would quit because of excessive workload?
According to the Gen Z Intelligence Report by Il Sole 24 Ore and WTW, 52 % of the young people surveyed would leave the company if the workload became unsustainable.
What matters most to Gen Z at work?
Work-life balance comes first (60.4 %), followed by stability and security (47.6 %), salary (39.6 %) and career (29.8 %).
Do the Italian figures also apply to Germany and Austria?
The study refers to Italy. But the direction matches what I observe in recruiting mandates in Bavaria, Austria and Northern Italy. For concrete decisions, it is worth looking at your own turnover and workload by team.
How can I retain young specialists better?
Communicate and measure workload honestly, ensure market-aligned compensation, offer time as a benefit and refill vacancies quickly so the team is not permanently overloaded. Kontakt aufnehmen
What this means for your business
Gen Z is not opting out of performance — it is refusing sustained overload. Companies that manage workload, compensation and team structure as one package retain their young specialists. Those who only turn one screw lose them — and increase the burden on everyone who stays.
Vacancy in the team — and the pressure is rising?
I support mid-sized companies in Bavaria, Austria and Northern Italy in filling critical positions quickly and precisely — from production and shift leadership to management. In a first conversation we clarify which route fits your situation.
Book a callThe template text is copied to your clipboard on click.
Sources
All statements are backed by publicly available sources (see article date). Not legal or tax advice.
Transparency, image credits and advertising disclosure
Responsible for editorial content pursuant to § 18(2) MStV: Sandra Lochmann, Bahnhofstraße 28, 82065 Baierbrunn, Germany.
Reference evidence: named quotations and client or partner references are published only with documented consent or a publicly verifiable source. Article-specific sources are listed below each post; business relationships are disclosed in the text.
Image credits: cover and preview images on this blog are AI-generated, editorially reviewed in-house productions by People · Places · Performance; usage rights are held by Sandra Lochmann. Portrait photography: © Sandra Lochmann, used with the consent of the person depicted. Third-party images, where used, are credited directly at the image with author and licence (e.g. Unsplash licence, CC BY 4.0). Third-party logos and trademarks are named for editorial reporting only; all rights remain with their owners.
Advertising disclosure: this article is editorial content and contains no paid advertising, no sponsorship and no affiliate links. Companies, regions, programmes and tools mentioned are named without commission or payment. Where a business relationship exists (e.g. ongoing mandates or partnerships), it is disclosed in the text. Paid cooperations would be clearly labelled 'Advertisement' at the beginning of the article (§ 5a(4) UWG, § 22 MStV).
AI notice: AI tools are used to support writing and translating these articles. Content, arguments, assessments and sources are editorially reviewed and taken responsibility for before publication (Art. 50 AI Act).