The generally accepted framework for working at a job is either you do it or you don’t. The expectation is that, if you’re working, you’re fully committed. All in. Giving it 110%, as the saying goes. Or else you’re taking a full leave of absence to manage an illness, for example, or to take a sabbatical.

Often this framework is sufficient. But there are plenty of times that it falls short: when a first-time parent returns from leave and is still adjusting to new family rhythms; when an adult child suddenly must assume eldercare responsibilities; when an individual faces a legal or health situation; or any number of other sources of acute stress. The catalyst could also be an opportunity rather than a crisis: starring in a play, for instance, or competing in an athletic tournament. In all these cases, a brief adjusted work schedule could be invaluable.

My work, inspired by my professor and mentor, the late Clayton Christensen, focuses on how to answer his question, “How will you measure your life?” It recognizes that our time and energy are always being allocated and adjusted across work, creative projects, family time, community, health, and spiritual commitments — a mix of purposefully chosen investments.

In my model, there are options beyond either pushing through a disruption in your life or, alternatively, taking a full leave of absence from work. And for good reason: Pushing through increases the likelihood of burnout and its long-term consequences on both employee and organizational health, while taking leave can also prove harmful, whether for the organization’s capabilities or for the employee’s engagement and career. Work is not just something we do; it contributes to identity, purpose, and community. And in a worst-case scenario, such a leave could harm future growth opportunities or become unintentionally permanent.

Enter the “season of stepping back.”

What a Season of Stepping Back Can Look Like

A season of stepping back can take many different forms. It could look like shifting from a manager role to an individual contributor, delaying a promotion, moving to a role with less travel and more-predictable hours, or trimming back a workload to allow for flexibility or shorter days. What’s true in all cases is this: It is time-limited; codesigned by the employee, their team and manager, and HR; has no negative ramifications for the person stepping back; and offers a seamless reentry when they are ready to reengage.

Unlike a formal switch to part-time or contract work, this is a temporary accommodation within an existing career trajectory, with no effect on future reviews, promotion opportunities, or tenure. Over the long term, such arrangements can benefit both workers and their organizations.

Take the example of Melissa, for instance, who was diagnosed with breast cancer (some identifying details have been changed). She contacted the head of human resources at the venture-backed company where she worked to discuss accommodations. She didn’t want to follow the typical solution in the United States of going on short-term disability leave. Melissa was clear that she didn’t want to stop working. She liked having something to think about other than her treatment; it offered some normalcy during a tumultuous period. So, she and HR crafted a set of parameters: She needed to start late on Mondays, end early on Fridays, and be off camera for meetings for a few months. While she was undergoing chemotherapy infusions, she would be available over email and on Slack but would decline or reschedule meetings.

The approach worked well. Melissa was able to take care of her health on her own terms and ramp back up at work when she was ready. Equally valuable, the company retained an ambitious, high-performing employee who had deep institutional knowledge and an even stronger sense of loyalty.

Consider, too, the case of Chas Carey (full disclosure: Chas is my husband). When serving as the deputy general counsel of the New York Office of Housing Recovery Operations in 2017, he was offered a role in an upcoming off-Broadway production. After talking to his boss and team about how he might make the opportunity work and still keep his job, Chas was able to shift his hours to a nontraditional schedule for the four weeks he was in daytime rehearsals and then, once performances began, cut back on hours by delegating and deprioritizing while tending to the most urgent and impactful work. After a four-week run, the production wrapped, and he returned to his “real life” with gratitude for the flexibility and a renewed energy for the work. Over the next three years, Chas continued to excel in his job and was promoted first to general counsel and then to acting director of the agency.