The numbers come first.
Only 40% of former CEOs felt satisfied with their transition out of the corner office in the first year after leaving, according to new data published by Boston Consulting Group in early August. The survey covered former chief executives of companies with at least $1 billion in revenue — meaning these are not executives who lacked resources, networks or options. They simply were not prepared.
By year two the picture improves sharply: 90% of CEOs reported satisfaction with how their retirement unfolded after the one-year mark. But that first year gap is consequential. It helps explain a pattern Fortune's Phil Wahba documented earlier this month — companies including Verizon, Boeing and Cracker Barrel have been pulling CEOs back out of retirement, often during periods of crisis, because a willing and experienced operator was available and the internal bench was not ready.
The identity problem no compensation package solves
Christine Barton, leader of BCG's North America CEO Advisory practice, frames the core tension plainly: 'Is the decision to get a new CEO job really motivated by value creation where you know a unique skill that you bring that only you can do, or is it … really more fear or vanity?'
The emotional mechanics are straightforward. CEOs lose structure, lose a role central to their identity, and lose the weight of consequential responsibility — all at once. Former Ulta Beauty CEO Mary Dillon, who came out of retirement to lead Foot Locker in her early 60s, told Fortune three years ago: 'I didn't realize how much I would miss having one big thing to focus on and how much I would miss leading a retail company.'
The BCG research identifies a practical sweet spot: three to four meaningful activities — board service, advisory roles, teaching — provide enough engagement to feel useful without becoming a second career by default. Barton calls it the 'portfolio career,' but stresses it must be intentional, built on genuine self-reflection rather than restlessness.
The real fix is upstream
Executive coaching tailored specifically to retirement preparation is a growing niche, BCG notes, and companies are increasingly investing in it. But Barton's clearest prescription points inward: 'Focus on building a robust internal pipeline now, long before your leader is ready to leave.'
That is where the governance story lives. A CEO who returns from retirement to rescue a struggling enterprise is a symptom, not a solution. It signals that the board and the outgoing leader failed to develop the next generation of operators while the window was open.
---
CEO Times take: Free enterprise runs on clear succession and accountable governance — not on recycling familiar names when the pipeline runs dry. The BCG data is a useful mirror for any board that treats leadership transition as an afterthought. Capital rewards organizations with deep benches and disciplined planning; it punishes those that confuse a founder's identity with the company's strategy. The 60% who struggled in year one are not a cautionary tale about retirement — they are a cautionary tale about what happens when institutions build around a single person instead of building institutions that outlast any single person.
