Wharton@Work

October 2025 | 

Maximize Utility, Not Burnout: Women in the Workforce

Maximize Utility, Not Burnout: Women in the Workforce

When it comes to productivity, performance, and retention, organizations are well aware of the cost of employee burnout. But few have taken a hard look at one of the most critical inflection points in a high-potential woman’s career and how it shapes the decisions she makes about whether to advance, plateau, or leave.

That inflection point now has a name: the squeeze.

Coined by Wharton economist Corinne Low in her new book Having It All (Flatiron Books, 2025), the squeeze describes a measurable, research-backed period in many women’s lives, typically during early parenthood, when demands on their time and energy hit a punishing peak. What’s novel about Low’s approach isn’t just that she defines the squeeze with data. It’s that she situates it within an economist’s broader lens on decision making, tradeoffs, and long-term utility — and that has powerful implications not just for women, but for the organizations and leaders who want to retain and empower them.

Why Understanding the Squeeze Matters for Managers

“We've done the hard work of diversifying the entry-level talent pipeline,” says Low, an associate professor of business economics and public policy at Wharton. “But women are still dropping out or stalling later in their careers. The data shows that the squeeze is the missing step — it's the thing we haven’t designed for.”

That “thing” is a period, typically five to seven years long, when childcare, housework, and career investments all ramp up simultaneously. For many, it begins when the first child is born and doesn’t ease until that child enters full-time school. That’s when work expectations remain steady even as personal demands increase dramatically. And while career investments have begun, the financial return on those investments hasn’t yet materialized. “So, you can’t take your foot off the gas,” Low explains, “but you also can’t afford to outsource everything.”

This squeeze leads many women to re-evaluate their goals and their job. The result? Companies lose experienced talent right when they’ve reached their most valuable and productive years. The good news, according to Low, is that this problem is solvable.

What the Research Says Women Need

Contrary to popular belief, women navigating the squeeze aren’t necessarily looking for endless flexibility. “What women actually want,” says Low, “is structure: boundaries, predictability, and respect for their time.”

Low points to research from Alexandre Mas and Amanda Pallais showing that women value standard, predictable schedules far more than flexibility. “When offered a 9-to-5 job versus one with unpredictable or constantly shifting hours, women were willing to give up significant pay to avoid the latter,” she notes.

She also offers a surprising counterexample: nursing. It’s highly structured shift work — rigid, demanding, and often inflexible — but it’s also 86 percent female. “The appeal,” says Low, “is that you know exactly when you’re on, and exactly when you’re off.”

That lesson applies well beyond healthcare. Leaders in fields where “always on” culture still reigns, such as law, finance, tech, and consulting, can benefit from rethinking how they structure time. Among Low’s evidence-backed suggestions:

  • Limit unpredictability. Replace open-ended availability with designated on-call shifts or rotational responsibilities.
  • Respect the clock. Create norms that allow people to leave by 5:00 p.m., and make it culturally acceptable to log back in at 8:00 p.m. after family responsibilities are handled.
  • Distinguish outcomes from effort. Focus performance evaluations on measurable impact, not hours clocked or face time.

“This isn’t about unlimited flexibility,” says Low. “It’s about structure, predictability, and helping people succeed during a specific high-pressure window,” Low emphasizes. “It’s about getting through a brief period so you can retain great employees for the long term.”

The Broader Economic Insight: Utility, Not Just Profit

Low is quick to point out that Having It All isn’t a typical self-help book. It’s a call to think like an economist — especially for women whose choices are too often framed by guilt or unrealistic expectations.

“I want women to think about their lives the way economists think about firms,” she says. “Firms aim to maximize profit. People should aim to maximize utility— a deeper, more enduring form of happiness, meaning, and fulfillment — over the course of a life.”

That lens helps women make more intentional choices, especially when work and life feel like a zero-sum game. “If you’re outsourcing housework, or taking a job that pays less but offers more time, or declining a promotion during the squeeze, those choices aren’t failures,” says Low. “They’re rational responses to your personal utility function.”

Reframing success in terms of long-term utility, instead of short-term career advancement, is a shift that can benefit everyone, including organizations and male leaders looking to better support working parents.

“Too often, we evaluate success by a narrow set of metrics, including title, hours worked, and revenue generated. But not everyone optimizes their life that way,” she says. “Understanding that doesn’t mean lowering standards. It means designing roles and careers that tap into what our employees actually need and want from their careers.”

Why This Matters for Everyone

Low’s work may focus on the economics of women’s time, but her message is universal: We all make better decisions when we take the long view. That includes managers making policies, employees charting careers, and companies rethinking how they define and reward success.

By shifting from “lean in” to “maximize utility,” Having It All reframes not just how we work — but why we work and how we live.

And as Low puts it, “That’s not just good for women. It’s good economics.”