Why 82% of middle managers feel invisible

The vast majority—82%—of middle managers feel invisible and frustrated. 

About 18 months ago, my team and I decided to survey more than 1,000 middle managers and found that many hate their jobs. No wonder, no one wants to be a middle manager anymore. 

These leaders are crucial for connecting strategy and execution, yet they often go unnoticed and unsupported. Historically overlooked, they find themselves sandwiched between senior leadership, which attracts ample research and investment, and frontline employees who are the focus of many organizational initiatives. 

It’s no surprise that, in the face of neglect, they overwhelmingly reported feeling invisible and frustrated, as well as burned out and powerless. The responses of the middle managers we surveyed laid bare what’s driving their discontent and exposed the systemic issues that can no longer be ignored.

Here’s why middle managers are so upset—and how we can better support them: 

The label ‘middle manager’ needs a rebrand 

Too often, the label of “middle manager” creates a dangerously wrong mindset for companies and makes these professionals feel disparaged and disrespected. 

In reality, these leaders are pivotal to an organization’s success, especially during times of change—but they are, as McKinsey rightly puts it, “a critical but neglected cohort.”

By labeling them all “middle managers,” we have linguistically reduced their value, ignoring the diverse skills and contributions they bring to the table across our organizations. 

This blanket, one-size-fits-all terminology not only underestimates their expertise but also perpetuates a culture of indifference towards their vital roles.

Without intervention or change, team members who feel disrespected can contribute to collaboration issues, communication and culture breakdowns, leaky leadership pipelines, and lackluster team performance.

Seniority does not predict impact

Our research shows that middle management impact is determined more by their leadership maturity than by their role seniority.

Leaders, including middle managers, function across many levels of impact. Those operating at higher levels of maturity are more valuable, influential, and confident in their leadership.

Our research views impact and seniority as two separate indices; while a positive correlation between these indices is generally true, the relationship is far weaker than you might expect.

Instead, what out team found is that most middle managers are struggling to transition into what I refer to as “B-suite leaders: middle managers with C-suite impact. In fact, only 6.5% of the middle managers profiled have reached the B-suite level, demonstrating the “gold standard” for managerial performance. 

Our research shows more middle managers need to shift their focus from process-oriented tasks to strategic decision-making and influence. High-impact B-suite leadership truly begins at the “influencer” level, where leaders start to determine what work gets done. However, most middle managers are stuck at the “innovato” level or below, concentrating almost exclusively on how work gets done. 

The rapidly expanding roles of middle managers

In our research, more than one manager called out “being a dumping ground for tasks that have no home.” And according to recent research by Gartner, 75% of HR leaders report that managers are overwhelmed with the expanding scope of their responsibilities. 

In the past, middle managers were responsible only for managing their direct reports. Today, middle managers are expected to take on many more responsibilities. This chronic scope creep and is now characterized by increasing levels of individual contributor work (Gartner estimates as much as 51%); more strategy work than they’ve been historically trained for; and colossal amounts of administrative work. 

Ultimately, this is a symptom of poor role definition and is compounded by chronic scope creep. Plus, the lack of definition is seen as a lack of recognition.

Increased pressure from all sides

According to a survey by Perceptyx, 39% of mid-level leaders say pressure from executive leadership has increased since last year. Leaders cited that they are constantly pushed to “do more with less.” And they also noted a widening gap in understanding at the executive level about the experience of being a middle manager today compared to when they were in the role.

In the same survey, 37% of managers report increased pressure from the teams they are leading, with demands that include dedicating more time to coaching and development. Managers also say that the right to be flexible and disconnect is coupled with increasing sensitivity for being called to account. 

And too often, middle managers are not empowered to take action and address the issues they face. 

Many organizations are frustrated with this narrative—they believe that they do empower their mid-level leaders, and that those leaders are failing to step up and show accountability. 

What our research shows is that permission alone is not sufficient to create empowerment. Many executive leaders are not letting go of authority or vesting their power to middle managers. In addition, many mid-level leaders are not sufficiently willing or skilled at managing expectations.  

The result is frustration at the top, where permission has been granted, and frustration in the middle, where nothing has really changed.  

Development is missing the mark

Last year, global HR analyst Josh Bersin said, “In 25 years, I have never seen such low levels of investment and maturity in leadership development.” 

In response, organizations are finally starting to invest in middle managers. 

Gartner tells us that 76% of organizations have significantly updated their leadership programs and are planning to increase spending; yet, results remain lacking. A full 71% of HR leaders don’t think they are effectively developing their mid-level leaders—and those leaders agree.

In a recent survey of 250 leaders, BoldHR found that 96% of experienced leaders are desperate for targeted, experience-appropriate training. So what does experience-appropriate actually mean?

Many organizations are huge fans of in-person training, but middle managers are not. They prefer short, sharp online experiences backed up by peer-based practical application supported by accountability.

Many organizations also run in-house mentoring programs. B-suite leaders find these challenging—they often need to talk about their emotions, strategic or cultural misgivings, or political dynamics that, with an important internal party, make them feel exposed and vulnerable. So, they talk about surface-level topics instead and remain feeling isolated at work. 

Why we love to hate middle managers

Let’s face it: The reputation of middle managers sucks. And it has sucked since 1977 when researcher Abraham Zaleznik branded middle management as administrative and the executive as visionary. This belittling narrative has not changed, even though the job has radically evolved. If anything, this label has stuck in corporate and social jargon and has become dangerously entrenched in the way we speak about them, think about them, and treat them.

When you think about it, society is quite hostile toward the middle manager. For instance, comments from billionaires like Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg loudly declare how little we value the middle manager as a society—and our middle managers are aware of it.

The role of the middle manager has long been considered either a stepping stone to the C-suite or a consolation prize for those who fail to make it. It’s not a proud career destination in its own right. No kids tell you they want to be a middle manager when they grow up.

Unfortunately, it’s a role that has long been underestimated, undefined, and overlooked. No wonder 82% of middle managers are feeling invisible and frustrated.