The fear of becoming obsolete—known as FOGO (Fear Of Getting Obsolete)—is taking hold among executives and senior leadership as well, especially in sectors undergoing constant transformation. Until recently, professional obsolescence was associated with junior profiles or roles easily automated. However, the rapid pace of technology is radically changing this paradigm.
It is not about fearing immediate job loss, but something deeper: the loss of strategic relevance in a context where artificial intelligence, data, and new business models are evolving faster than traditional career trajectories. When this concern lingers over time, it can lead to techno-stress, manifested as mental overload, the sense of not keeping up with the pace of change, and difficulties disconnecting.
In senior leadership, this kind of stress is rarely verbalized, but it has a direct impact on decision-making, team management, and the ability to lead with a long-term vision. “We’re not talking about a lack of technical capabilities, but a growing sense of losing strategic weight in the organization,” explains Mariana Spata, Chief Commercial Officer of Catenon. Obsolescence, moreover, is not so much technical as strategic: it’s not about mastering specific tools, but about understanding how these transformations affect the business, talent, and competitiveness.
A Fear That Is Not Unfounded
Data backs up this concern. The World Economic Forum, in its Future of Jobs Report, estimates that 44% of current skills will change before 2027 as a result of automation and artificial intelligence. In the same vein, a Workday Research study (2024) notes that 46% of professionals believe their competencies will become obsolete in less than five years. The IBM Institute for Business Value points out that 40% of the workforce will need reskilling in the next three years, while Gallup finds that 22% of employees already fear technology will render their jobs obsolete, a figure clearly rising since 2021.
This pressure intensifies among leadership profiles. CEOs and top executives face the demand to integrate technology and AI into strategy without losing sight of the business.
In the case of COOs and Chief Operating Officers, especially in industrial and energy sectors, automation is advancing faster than traditional management models. CFOs and financial executives, for their part, must adapt to the growing use of AI in reporting, control, and risk management.
Added to that is the role of HR directors, responsible for leading reskilling processes and cultural transformation in highly uncertain environments, as well as the roles of commercial and marketing leaders, immersed in the transition toward data-driven models and the use of generative AI tools.
The Leadership the Market Is Beginning to Demand
This context is redefining the leadership the market is asking for. Companies no longer seek merely accumulated experience; they want capabilities such as continuous learning, adaptability, technological vision, and emotional leadership. Hiring, succession, and executive assessment processes are evolving rapidly: experience remains valuable, but only when paired with a clear ability to evolve.
From the talent market, specialized firms like Catenon are observing increasingly clear signals that this phenomenon is affecting the leadership architecture of organizations: quiet turnover, difficulties filling critical positions, and misalignments between traditional profiles and the new demands of the digital business. A talent-market reading
“The challenge isn’t just attracting senior leadership talent anymore, but ensuring that leadership remains relevant in an environment that changes at unprecedented speeds,” says Mariana Spata, Chief Commercial Officer of Catenon.
The challenge for companies isn’t simply to attract executive talent, but to guarantee that leadership remains relevant in an environment changing at exponential speed. Understanding how the fears, competencies, and expectations of senior leadership are evolving has become a strategic issue for future business competitiveness.
