Anna Wintour may be shifting roles, but she’s not slowing down.
Wintour’s decision, announced Thursday, to give up the title of editor in chief of Vogue, a role she’s held since 1983, signals a colossal shift at the venerable fashion publication. Yet Wintour isn’t departing.
Wintour, who is about a decade over the average US retirement age at 75, will hire a new US “head of editorial content” for Vogue, who will report to her. The magazine reported that Wintour would retain many of her duties, including overseeing the Met Ball, and remain as global editorial director of Vogue and chief content officer for Condé Nast, Vogue’s parent company.
The move is the latest instance of a boldfaced name in leadership planning a shift in their responsibilities, rather than relinquishing them. Condé Nast did not respond to a request for comment from BI on succession plans.
Take Warren Buffett, who’s 94 and the longest-serving chief of an S&P 500 company, and plans to stay on as chairman after he hands over the CEO job at the end of the year. Jamie Dimon, who’s approaching two decades atop JPMorgan, has also said he could stay on as chairman even after he gives up his executive duties.
That can be good for individual leaders’ well-being and for the entities they lead, though leadership experts told Business Insider that staying too long can also introduce risks.
Wintour has not indicated that this is the first step in her retirement plan, but in her comments to staff this week, she emphasized her desire to shape the next generation of talent.
“Now, I find that my greatest pleasure is helping the next generation of impassioned editors storm the field with their own ideas, supported by a new, exciting view of what a major media company can be,” she said.
The benefit for longtime bosses to remain engaged is that it can be good for their sense of purpose and ease their transition to an eventual retirement. It can also benefit their team, as they have the opportunity to pass on a wealth of institutional knowledge to their successor to help avoid missteps.
“There’s a steady hand at the ship while this transition is happening,” Kevin Groves, a professor of management at Pepperdine’s Graziadio Business School, told BI.
A longevity boost
Transitioning — rather than quitting outright — has other perks for leaders.
Jasmine Sawhne, a Los Angeles psychiatrist who helps clients with life transitions, told BI that type-A personalities who are wedded to their work tend to benefit from a gradual retirement rather than an abrupt one. “Retirement can affect one’s identity, their sense of purpose and daily structure, mental health — it is a huge, significant life change,” she said.
At the same time, good cognitive health also makes it easier for people to keep working. A recent report on the “silver economy” found that in 41 advanced and emerging economies, a person who reached the age of 70 in 2022 had, on average, the same cognitive ability as a 53-year-old in 2000, making it more likely that they would stay in the labor market.
Suddenly withdrawing from a stimulating work environment can impact executive function and memory, which can trickle down to impact everything from a person’s sleep quality to their sense of meaning. Leaders who have built-in interactions at work can also experience extreme loneliness when they quit.
For those with high-status roles like Wintour, a well-planned transition can be “a really critical step so that they can avoid that post-retirement existential void,” Sawhne said.
Many centenarians credit their careers (or similar activities, like part-time work or volunteering) with their longevity, keeping them mentally sharp and socially connected. From politicians and big-time execs to Tom Cruise, who’s said he plans to make movies until he’s 100, it’s often hard for strivers to give up the roles they love.
Helping fill the biggest shoes
Another perk of shifting responsibilities rather than retiring outright is preventing the “emotional whiplash” of an organization adjusting to a new leader, Sawhne said. It can also give leaders more time to train or mentor their successors.
She said remaining at the helm long-term can cause friction if the new hire doesn’t understand how much authority they really have or who’s truly in charge.
Gary Rich, a leadership coach who’s worked with Fortune 500 companies on succession planning, told BI that it can be hard for leaders, particularly ones who’ve demonstrated long-term success, to give up their roles even when they say they’re ready to.
Rich said incoming leaders often value having someone who’s been at the job stick around for a bit to assist in the transition. He said that typically 20% of his work involves coaching the new person, while 80% involves convincing the outgoing leader to let go.
He said the reason is simple: High-powered leaders often draw enormous validation and self-esteem from their roles.”Asking people to let go of that is asking them to let go of a major part of their identity,” Rich said.
The trick is, he said, not to stay too long. Rich said the limit should be three months.
Planning for the future
As great as a soft exit is, the key is making sure it leads somewhere.
Rich said it becomes difficult for the new guard to establish power when the old boss hangs on, and members of the organization might still go to the predecessor through back-channel communications.
Nailing a subtle role shift is easier said than done. Sawhne said it’s crucial to have a support system of people who can offer validation that “you’re not retiring from influencing some company; you’re just retiring from the intensity of the work that you’re putting in.”
Read the full article here
