Top 15 global trends reshaping work and society in 2026 – Part 2

In Part 1, we explored the structural drivers reshaping work: AI flattening hierarchies (Gartner, 2024; McKinsey, 2024), trust collapsing under the weight of deepfakes and fraud (Experian, 2026; Forrester, 2025), and the rise of human capital and ESG into investor-grade scrutiny (Ocean Tomo, 2025; GECN, 2025; WTW, 2025).

But the more interesting question is what happens next – because people do not passively accept structural change. They respond. They adapt. They leave. They reinvent themselves.

Read: Top 15 global trends reshaping work and society in 2026

Part 2 focuses on that response: Gen Z rewriting the psychological contract, gigs and portfolio careers becoming mainstream resilience strategies, wellbeing shifting from “nice-to-have” to performance constraint, and geopolitical/local volatility forcing organisations to operate in fragmented realities.

Next-gen workforce: Purpose over ladders in a gig world

Generation Z is profoundly influencing workplace design, not through slogans but through behaviour. EY’s 2025 survey indicates intense commitment to skill-building, with 99% of Gen Z respondents actively refining professional skills.

Purpose increasingly outweighs traditional career progressions, and LinkedIn 2025 data shows growing preference for autonomy and alignment over formal titles. Why impose rigid hierarchies when meaning and growth are increasingly decisive in retention?

Cake.com’s (2024) Gen Z workforce statistics hone the point: 70% of Gen Z graduates expect promotions within 18 months, while 74% would leave over inadequate compensation. Preferences for hybrid work are strong, with 71% seeking hybrid arrangements – yet 75% of managers report difficulties in meeting these expectations.

Read: Unlocking the Potential of Generation Z in the Workplace

Gen Z evaluates culture through interpersonal behaviour and fairness, not policy language (EY, 2025). The leadership challenge is clear: why cling to inflexible models when adaptability is increasingly the price of talent?

This does not mean “Gen Z is entitled”. It means the old psychological contract is eroding. Loyalty is no longer traded for future opportunity; it is increasingly traded for present development, credibility, and fairness.

The normalisation of gigs: Portfolio careers as resilience strategy

The gig economy is no longer a side-show. It is becoming a default labour strategy for millions – not only for survival, but for autonomy and diversification. TransUnion’s (2025) findings suggest that 62% of US adults engage in side gigs.

Goldman Sachs (2025) estimates gig participation rates at 5%-15% and platform expansion at 5%-8% annually. These figures reflect a reality that many employers still underestimate: the “one employer, one identity” model is weakening.

MBO Partners reported in 2025 that 36% of the workforce is freelancing and contributing $1.27 trillion to the economy, with high-income independent work growing – including 5.6 million freelancers earning over $100 000. The implication is profound: portfolio careers are not marginal; they are becoming mainstream.

This trend carries two uncomfortable messages for organisations. First: talent is less captive. Second: talent ecosystems matter.

Organisations can either treat gig work as a threat to control – or they can design workforce models that incorporate independent capability in a structured, ethical way. That requires mature contracting, onboarding, cybersecurity, IP protection, and performance management suited to project-based work rather than lifetime employment assumptions.

The provocation remains: why enforce ladders when portfolio approaches offer flexibility, resilience and faster skill acquisition – especially in a volatile environment?

Wellbeing and resilience: Mental health as performance imperative

The wellbeing conversation has shifted tone. It is no longer purely a moral conversation (“we should care”), but an operational one (“we cannot perform if we ignore this”). The World Health Organisation (2024) estimates global economic losses from mental health challenges at $1 trillion annually.

SHRM’s 2024 research indicates 44% of US employees report workloads that are unreasonably high and could result in burnout. When a significant share of your workforce is overloaded, creativity becomes fragile, and productivity becomes brittle.

Other indicators reinforce the scale; NAMI (2024) links mental health challenges to a 33% decline in output, Headspace’s 2024 findings suggest 47% of workplace stress originates from job demands, affecting physical health for 77% of respondents, the American Psychological Association (2024) reports 76% of workers experiencing symptoms, with 84% linked to employment.

There is a 300% increase in mental health-related absences (ComPsych, 2024) in contrast to cultures of trust that enhance belonging and reduce isolation (MHA, 2024).

The core leadership lesson is brutally practical: wellbeing is shaped more by management behaviour than by wellness posters.

If the organisation’s operating model produces chronic overload, wellness initiatives become theatre. Psychological safety also becomes non-negotiable – because fear kills learning, and learning is essential in volatile environments (APA, 2024).

Even where organisations invest in wellbeing initiatives, the emphasis must be on work design and leadership capability. Unresolved issues lead to focus lapses and reduced efficiency (FitOn, 2025).

The question for leaders is blunt: will you redesign work to support human sustainability – or maintain a productivity myth that quietly destroys capability?

Global and local volatility: Navigating fragmented realities

Geopolitics is no longer “background noise” – it is shaping markets, talent flows, technology access, capital movement and AI competition is an amplifier of instability (BCG, 2025). The World Economic Forum (2026) identifies interstate tensions among the primary global risks for the coming years.

There is now a multipolar world order that demands stronger organisational adaptability (Lazard, 2026). The escalating threats in US-China relations urges strategy recalibration (Esade, 2026) and anticipates possible political upheaval and pressure points across the US and Europe (Eurasia, 2026).

This environment challenges the old “one global model” assumption. Scenario planning, redundancy, supply chain resilience, and regional flexibility become decisive.

The provocation remains: why pursue outdated globalist certainty when localised resilience is increasingly competitive advantage?

South Africa illustrates this principle vividly. The Government of National Unity faces structural instability alongside the approach of the 2026 local elections (Atradius, 2025). Daily Maverick (2026) ties economic expansion to coalition longevity, whilst Oxford Economics (2025) warns factionalism could constrain investment.

The State of the Nation Address highlights priorities across jobs, energy and water infrastructure (Gov.za, 2026), distilling key takeaways and areas of policy alignment and potential upside (Daily Investor, 2026).

The lesson is not to wait for certainty. It is to design for uncertainty. Resilient organisations do not require perfect state functioning – they build operating systems that cope with disruption: diversified supply, distributed capability, robust talent pipelines, and cultures that can absorb stress without imploding.

CEO sentiment: Confidence as a lagging indicator

Leadership sentiment remains volatile – and in many ways – it is a lagging indicator of real conditions. EY’s 2025 survey reflects optimism mixed with instability. The Conference Board recorded CEO confidence at 48 in Q4 in 2025 while Business Roundtable’s index reached 80 in the same period.

This was further supported by KPMG (2025) who found 68% of global CEOs expressing positivity. In contrast, Chief Executive observed flat confidence in February 2026 with Heidrick (2025) identifying localised pockets of assurance. Lastly, Fortune (2025) emphasises underlying resilience.

The risk is leadership volatility becoming contagious: sudden restructures, inconsistent strategy, rushed technology decisions, and aggressive cost-cutting that damages capability. The antidote is disciplined clarity: prioritisation, transparency, and leadership that can say, “We do not know everything – but we know what matters next.”