You closed the deal, hit the number, got the promotion. And then, somewhere around midnight or on a Sunday when the calendar has finally gone quiet, there is a flatness where the satisfaction was supposed to be.
Writing about this reaches for the same two authorities almost every time: a hierarchy of needs and a line about a why and a how. Both are worth examining, and neither survives the examination in the form it is usually presented.
The Quote Everyone Attributes to the Wrong Person
“He who has a why to live for can bear almost any how” gets printed under Frankl’s name, including in an earlier version of this article.
It is Nietzsche’s, from Twilight of the Idols in 1889: “Hat man sein warum? des Lebens, so verträgt man sich fast mit jedem wie?” Kaufmann renders it as “If we have our own why of life, we shall get along with almost any how.”
Frankl quoted it and credited Nietzsche explicitly, writing that “Nietzsche’s words, ‘He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how,’ could be the guiding motto.” So Frankl handled the attribution correctly and the leadership-writing industry that borrowed it from him did not.
That is a small error with a useful lesson attached. A claim passes through enough hands that the citation falls off, and what remains is a sentence with an impressive name under it. The same thing happens to findings, which is a more expensive problem than it happens to quotations.
Frankl’s own contribution stands without the quote. He developed logotherapy after surviving Nazi concentration camps, published Man’s Search for Meaning in 1946, and described what he called the existential vacuum: an inner emptiness that follows not from failure but from the absence of a felt sense of purpose. That is a description of the thing this article is about, from someone with standing to offer it.
The Pyramid Maslow Did Not Draw
The hierarchy of needs is the other standard reference, usually arriving as a pyramid with self-actualisation at the top and an implication that most people stall somewhere in the middle.
Two things about that. Maslow never created the pyramid. The first version of that diagram came from Charles McDermid, a consulting psychologist, in a 1960 article in Business Horizons. Maslow’s paper was “A Theory of Human Motivation”, published in Psychological Review in 1943, and it did not look like a pyramid.
More importantly, the ordering has never held up well. A review by Wahba and Bridwell in 1976 found “little evidence … for the specific ranking of needs that Maslow described or for the existence of a definite hierarchy at all”, and that conclusion was “supported by the majority of longitudinal data and cross-sectional studies”. Hofstede argued in 1984 that the ordering was ethnocentric. The model’s validity remains contested.
So the tidy explanation that status rewards keep people parked at the esteem tier is a tidy explanation built on a diagram its author did not draw, arranged in an order the data does not support. Worth dropping, even though it is satisfying.
An earlier version of this article also claimed that Maslow spent his later years concerned that modern reward systems were designed to keep high achievers at the esteem level. No source for that has been found, and it has been removed.
What Replaces the Pyramid
Deci and Ryan’s work on self-determination identifies autonomy, competence and relatedness as basic psychological needs, without arranging them in a queue. Needs that operate in parallel describe senior careers better than a ladder does: a role can deliver competence in volume while leaving autonomy and relatedness thin, and no amount of additional competence compensates.
Crocker and Wolfe supply the sharper concept, in Psychological Review in 2001: contingencies of self-worth, meaning the specific domains in which a sense of being worthwhile is staked on how things go. In domains of contingency, they write, “people typically have the goal to prove themselves rather than the goal to learn, grow, or improve themselves.”
They describe the arrangement as “a trade-off between increased motivation and increased emotional vulnerability”. Which reframes the emptiness. It is not a failure to reach a higher tier. It is the predictable position of someone who has been proving rather than developing for a long time, and who has now run out of things left to prove.
The Treadmill Claim, Corrected
The usual accompanying claim is that the hedonic treadmill never stops and satisfaction always resets. The best available test of that says otherwise.
Lindqvist, Östling and Cesarini surveyed Swedish lottery players five to twenty-two years after a major win, following pre-registered procedures, and published in the Review of Economic Studies in 2020. Large-prize winners showed “sustained increases in overall life satisfaction that persist for over a decade and show no evidence of dissipating over time”. And then the sentence that matters here: “The estimated treatment effects on happiness and mental health are significantly smaller.”
Nothing reset. Two different things moved by different amounts. The evaluation of the life improved durably; how the days actually felt moved much less. That is a better account of the midnight flatness than a treadmill, because it explains why the success is real and the feeling still does not arrive. The caveat belongs with it: this is research on unearned money, not on careers.
Three Things Worth Noticing
Descriptions rather than a test, and none of them produces a verdict.
- Each goal hands over to the next without a pause. There is no rest point, only a moving horizon, and the achievements function as fuel rather than as anything you get to keep.
- The reason does not survive inspection. If the title went, the revenue went, the recognition went, what would be left that is worth doing? If that is hard to answer quickly, the difficulty is the information.
- Unstructured time is harder than work. A quiet weekend puts a person in contact with themselves, which is uncomfortable for anyone who has been using occupation as the method of avoiding it.
Clance and Imes described an adjacent pattern in 1978 after clinical work with 150 highly successful women who explained achievements away while retaining criticism as evidence of deficiency. They were describing a pattern rather than measuring how common it is, and later work using structured questionnaires found men reporting it with comparable frequency.
Not a Midlife Crisis, and Not a Diagnosis Either
The popular frame is the midlife crisis, with its sports car and its dramatic reinvention. That framing makes a serious question look like a symptom of immaturity.
The opposite overreach is just as available, and an earlier version of this article committed it: describing the emptiness as the psyche demanding a deeper layer of development, and warning that medicating it away makes it worse. Neither claim has a source, and the second one is a statement about a clinical course that nobody here is qualified to make.
What can be said is narrower. A persistent flatness after achieving what you aimed at is worth taking seriously as information about what the aiming was for. And if it has moved past that into something affecting how you function, that belongs with a licensed professional. Nothing here substitutes for one, including what follows.
The clearest place to watch this happen is the milestone that arrives and changes nothing.
Where Your Worth Is Currently Staked
Crocker’s point is that the domains are specific, which means they can be named. The Executive Identity Profile is a confidential assessment of where your sense of worth currently rests across five dimensions, and which of them is carrying more than it should. It takes about ten minutes, and it opens a conversation rather than closing one. Begin your profile here.
If this was worth your time, there is a letter. One short piece a week on identity, self-worth and the arithmetic of senior work. It costs nothing, and leaving takes one click. See what arrives.
References
- Nietzsche, F. (1889). Götzen-Dämmerung, “Sprüche und Pfeile”.
- Frankl, V. E. (1946). Man’s Search for Meaning, originally published as Ein Psychologe erlebt das Konzentrationslager.
- Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346
- Wahba & Bridwell (1976), review of the evidence for Maslow’s need hierarchy.
- Crocker, J., & Wolfe, C. T. (2001). Contingencies of self-worth. Psychological Review, 108, 593–623. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.108.3.593
- Lindqvist, E., Östling, R., & Cesarini, D. (2020). Long-run effects of lottery wealth on psychological well-being. Review of Economic Studies, 87, 2703–2726. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdaa006
- Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. Plenum.
- Clance, P. R., & Imes, S. A. (1978). The imposter phenomenon in high achieving women: Dynamics and therapeutic intervention. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice, 15(3), 241–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0086006
Further Reading
If this resonated, these go deeper. You can also browse the full Research Library for all recommendations.
- The Gifts of Imperfection by Brené Brown. On letting go of what you think you should be and embracing who you are, a quieter but often more transformative read than Daring Greatly.
- Think Again by Adam Grant. On the value of intellectual humility and the willingness to rethink conclusions; a counterweight to the certainty that senior roles seem to demand.
- Emotional Agility by Susan David. On how to stop struggling with your inner world and start using it as information; particularly useful for high performers who’ve learned to override their feelings.
Related reading