A few years ago, I encountered a mid-career executive in the creative advertising sector who, by all external measures, appeared successful, energetic, and deeply invested in her work. Yet she came to consultation under pressure from her family as she was exhibiting sudden emotional volatility, tearfulness, irritability at trivial incidents, and severe distress in both personal and professional domains.
Advertising and communications have long been known as high-burnout industries. Fast turnaround deadlines, razor-thin margins, high pitch for creativity under pressure, client demands, and internal politics all contribute.
In current times, additional pressures amplify the risk, these include: Blurred boundaries between work/life (with remote and hybrid working, the “always-on” culture has expanded); Increased scrutiny and pace with real-time media, social platforms, and demand for viral or trend-driven content; in addition to organizational uncertainty and downsizing in traditional media, merging agencies, and evolving revenue models. Over and above. There’s the leadership fatigue and trickle-down culture: A Financial Times (FT) article notes that senior executives are quitting over burnout and internal politics, which signals how insufficient support at the top intensifies pressure on mid-level staff.
As these stressors pile up, vulnerable employees – especially those with overachieving or perfectionist inclinations – face escalating risk of emotional collapse.
Up to recently, burnout had been less broadly discussed in corporate media; however, today, amid intensifying competition, tighter budgets, remote/hybrid working, and the perpetual demand for novelty, the risk of burnout in creative industries is more acute than ever; in the aforementioned recent FT piece about executives exiting roles due to burnout and internal politics, the conversation has moved from fringe to mainstream as “Elon Musk is hit by exodus of senior staff over burnout and politics”
But awareness is not enough; what we learn from historical cases – and the evidence accumulated since – must inform stronger, concrete interventions. In this article I revisit that 2003 case, integrate current research, and call for a sharper, systemic response from agencies, media groups, and communication firms.
The individual’s breakdown: more than “stress”
In the specific case I spoke about, the patient did not simply complain of “being tired.” Her symptom cluster included: exaggerated emotional reactivity (tantrum-like frustration at minor triggers), affective instability, pervasive functional impairment in her professional performance and interpersonal relations, a personality structure marked by high achievement, conscientiousness, strong internal motivation, and emotional investment in work.
The initial psychiatric differential considered an anger disorder versus burnout, but the case more neatly aligned with modern characterizations of burnout: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization (or cynicism), and reduced professional efficacy.
Yet a few complicating features are worth emphasizing:
Burnout overlaps with other mental health syndromes. The boundary between burnout, major depression, and adjustment disorders is porous; individuals can transit between them, or suffer coexisting mood symptoms.
Emotional dysregulation is under-appreciated. Whereas many discussions treat burnout as a kind of fatigue, this case shows that irritability, lowered stress tolerance, and affective instability may be central features when burnout becomes decompensated.
Timeliness matters. By the time the patient sought help, the syndrome was advanced—but because intervention was reasonably prompt, recovery was possible.
The patient underwent a time-limited psychotherapy protocol (initially 12 weekly sessions, then tapering to biweekly). Around session 8, symptomatic relief began; by session 20, the patient self-reported remission of the acute burnout syndrome, and regained functional stability. Factors cited by the patient as crucial included greater self-awareness, cognitive reframing of work beliefs, boundary-setting, and use of coping strategies.
This aligns well with newer meta-analytic evidence: structured psychosocial interventions (especially cognitive and behavioural modalities) reduce burnout symptoms, improve occupational functioning, and lower relapse risk. Such evidence confirms that burnout is treatable – if caught sufficiently early.
Additional evidence from the literature strengthens the case:
Longitudinal work shows that burnout and depressive symptoms predict and exacerbate each other over time. Also, interventions targeting organizational factors (e.g. workload, role clarity, social support) produce upstream prevention benefits. It also goes out without saying, that early detection (screening, supervisory training, peer networks) correlates with better trajectories and reduced chronicity.
Contemporary parallels and warnings
Today, remote and hybrid working – once hailed as flexibility enablers – now carry hidden risks of isolation, blurred transition boundaries, and lack of informal support checks. The modern creative worker may endure longer stretches of overwork without external relief.
Drawing both from this case and current evidence, I propose the following for the communications, advertising, and media sectors:
1. Systemic prevention must precede individual treatment
Leadership training in burnout awareness. Executives and creative leads should undergo education to spot early signs of deterioration (emotional volatility, drop in responsiveness, irritability). This, coupled with workload audits and buffer systems. Agencies should embed “creative slack” time, avoid chronically overcommitted portfolios, and plan realistic lead times.
Also, role clarity and autonomy. Ambiguity and micromanagement exacerbate stress; promoting autonomy, clear expectations, and decision latitude helps buffer burnout. All the above, coupled with peer support and “check-ins.” Internal peer networks, supervision groups, or “safety check” conversations can detect stress before collapse.
2. Faster access to evidence-based clinical support
On-site or affiliated mental health services. Agencies might partner with mental health clinics (public or private) to provide rapid access to counselling or psychotherapy. In addition to screening and referral pathways. Annual or semi-annual wellbeing checks or stress surveys, plus clear referral routes once a threshold is crossed. Subsidized psychological care. Covering or partially covering therapy for high-stress staff signals institutional commitment.
3. Tailored approaches for creatives
Emotional regulation training. Because burnout in high-investment creatives often entails affective volatility, training modules in mindfulness, emotion regulation, and tolerating frustration should be included in professional development. Boundary and switching rituals. Encourage rituals of psychological transition (e.g. decompression routines, timeouts, digital sabbath) to mark boundaries between work and personal life. Also, flexible scheduling and demand management. Resist “hero culture” norms; rotate staff off high-stakes accounts periodically to avoid overload accumulation.
4. Research, monitoring, and evaluation
Industry benchmarking. Agencies and creative firms should participate in anonymized benchmarking of burnout prevalence, turnover, and mental health outcomes. This, should be coupled with program evaluation. Any intervention (e.g. wellness programs, therapy access) should be tracked longitudinally to assess effect sizes, relapse prevention, and cost-benefit outcomes.
Cross-disciplinary collaboration. Partnerships among mental health researchers, communications scholars, and industry practitioners can refine intervention design specific to creative sectors.
Today, as the FT warns, even senior executives are stepping away under the strain of burnout and internal politics. That should serve as a warning: the creative industries must no longer treat burnout as a personal failing but as an urgent organizational and public health issue.
I invite the readers of Communicate Magazine—agency principals, creative directors, HR leaders, and communication planners—to consider: what structures do you have in place to prevent, detect, and treat burnout in your teams? The culture of overwork may be a competitive differentiator short-term, but human resilience is finite. Let us move from reactive rescue to proactive stewardship of the creative workforce.
