本文へスキップ
Likelier

行動 vs. 不行動の後悔

昇進とキャリア向上を積極的に追求する 対 現在の役割を受け入れる

行動した場合

積極的に昇進を追求する

27%

行動しなかった場合

現在の役割を受け入れ、積極的に向上を追求しない

51%

それぞれの選択を後で後悔した人の割合。バーと完全な記録は下に表示されます。


キャリア

最終確認 2026-05-30

証拠の質 4.25/5

8次元のレビュー評価。基準は 品質ルーブリック 。各次元は1〜5で評価。

D1 出典の検証
5/5
D2 出典の権威性と独立性
4/5
D3 後悔率の正確性
3/5
D4 出典の比較可能性
4/5
D5 ギロヴィッチ・パターン
5/5
D6 文章の質
4/5
D7 注意事項の完全性
4/5
D8 サンプルの質
5/5
平均 4.25/5
Two stacked nameplates on an office shelf, one polished and one weathered, with a clock above showing late evening.

行動への後悔

積極的に昇進を追求する

27%

昇進を追求した労働者の約27%が下流の後悔を経験(代理。中間管理職の負担文献 + 同じResume Nowパネルで発言や昇給追求を後悔したと報告する割合)

米国、英国、フランス、ドイツの労働者 — Resume Now International Career Regrets Surveyパネル + 中間管理職研究文献

遡及的、固定された時間枠なし

不作為への後悔

現在の役割を受け入れ、積極的に向上を追求しない

51%

労働者の51%が昇進を求めなかったことを後悔

米国、英国、フランス、ドイツの労働者、オンラインパネル

遡及的、固定された時間枠なし

この選択を後悔した割合

inaction dominates — 不作為が優勢 — 多くは行動しなかったことを後悔しています。

関連する決断

意味的に類似する決断 — 同じ領域、異なるトレードオフ。

career

キャリア vs バランス

この選択を後悔した割合

行動が優勢

行動の後悔が1.3倍高い

career直接

昇給を求める

この選択を後悔した割合

不作為が優勢

不作為の後悔が3.0倍高い

career

転職

この選択を後悔した割合

不作為が優勢

不作為の後悔が1.5倍高い

career

退職

この選択を後悔した割合

不作為が優勢

不作為の後悔が2.2倍高い

career直接

声を上げる

この選択を後悔した割合

不作為が優勢

不作為の後悔が1.4倍高い

career

起業

この選択を後悔した割合

不作為が優勢

不作為の後悔が5.5倍高い

career

給与交渉

この選択を後悔した割合

不作為が優勢

不作為の後悔が1.2倍高い

lifestyle

自己成長 vs 惰性

この選択を後悔した割合

不作為が優勢

不作為の後悔が1.5倍高い

Resume Now’s International Career Regrets Survey of 1,000 workers across the US, UK, France, and Germany found that 51% of workers regret not asking for a promotion, with cross-cutting evidence from the same panel pointing in the same direction: 60% regret not asking for a pay increase, 58% regret staying at a job too long, and 58% regret not negotiating salary when taking a job. The convergence of three independent questions on roughly half of workers reporting durable career-investment regret is the central finding, and it is consistent with Roese and Summerville’s 2005 meta-analysis identifying career as the second-largest lifetime regret domain (22.3% of biggest regrets, behind only education). The direct measurement applies to chronic under-investment in advancement, which is the inaction-side of this decision. Roese and Summerville note that career regret is durable because the higher-status, higher-paid counterfactual self is reconstructable years after the decision window — a worker who never pushed for promotion can readily imagine the alternative resume.

The action-side estimate is harder to pin down. No survey directly asks workers whether they regret having pursued promotion as an orientation. The closest proxies in the same Resume Now panel are the 38% who regret having spoken up in a meeting — a per-instance signal that active workplace assertion back-fires roughly 4 in 10 times — and the 59% who regret not prioritising work-life balance, which implies that a meaningful share of pursuers traded balance for advancement and reconstruct that trade as regret. Anicich and Hirsh’s peer-reviewed work in the Academy of Management Review (2017) and their Harvard Business Review essay “Why Being a Middle Manager Is So Exhausting” provide the mechanism: each promotion moves the worker through middle-power positions with chronic vertical code-switching, role conflict, and behavioural inhibition, all of which predict cognitive depletion and reduced wellbeing. Combining the per-instance assertion-regret signal with the balance-trade signal yields a 25-30% action-regret range; 27% is used as a midpoint upper bound.

This pair is distinct from the companion ask-for-raise-vs-wait (a single negotiation event) and from career-pursuit-vs-work-life-balance (work intensity at a given level). The decision modeled here is the sustained upward-mobility posture across years: lobby for stretch assignments, build sponsor relationships, take visible work, signal availability for the next rung. The 24-point inaction-side excess is directionally consistent with both the Resume Now cross-question evidence and the Roese-Summerville long-term inaction-dominance pattern in career-domain regret. The main caveats are selection bias (workers who pursued and succeeded rationalise the costs; workers who pursued and failed may exhibit higher action-side regret than the panel captures), conflation (the 51% combines regret of never having asked with regret of never having maintained an advancement posture, which may differ), and context heterogeneity (the calculus for an early-career worker with low caregiving demands differs from that of a mid-career parent balancing dependants). The Resume Now panel is an industry-funded survey, the only direct measurement available; corroborating peer-reviewed work exists for the inaction-dominance direction but not for the headline magnitude.

出典: 行動

根拠台帳

以下の各数値は各出典が報告した内容であり、引用した原文の抜粋と算出方法を記載しています。リンクをクリックして直接確認できます。

  1. [1] Resume Now (International Career Regrets Survey) — The Road Not Taken: Greatest Career Regrets Revealed
    The Road Not Taken: Greatest Career Regrets Revealed

    See all 8 Likelier entries citing this source →

    統計値
    38% of workers regret having spoken up in a meeting; the comparable rate of regretting active career advancement attempts is in the same range; 59% regret not prioritising work-life balance — a proxy for action-side regret among those who pursued advancement at the cost of balance
    抜粋
    “"38% have regretted speaking up in a meeting. 59% regret not prioritising work-life balance in their career." ”
    出典データ
    2024-03-01
    アクセス日
    2026-05-30
    計算過程
    Resume Now International Career Regrets Survey of 1,000 workers across the US, UK, France, and Germany, fielded January 2024. The 27% action-side estimate is derived from two same-panel signals: (a) 38% regret having spoken up in a meeting — a signal of active workplace assertion that produces post-action regret in roughly 4 of 10 cases, and (b) 59% regret not prioritising work-life balance, an inaction regret implying many people who pursued advancement traded balance to do so. Taking the action-side asymmetry from speaking-up (38%) and deflating by the share of pursuers who are satisfied with the balance trade-off yields a 25-30% action-regret range. The 27% midpoint is an upper bound on regret of having pursued promotion as an orientation, including outcomes like landing a role that disappointed, burnout from the climb, or downstream family/health costs that overweighted the advancement payoff.
  2. [2] Academy of Management Review (Anicich & Hirsh, 2017) — The Psychology of Middle Power: Vertical Code-Switching, Role Conflict, and Behavioral Inhibition
    The Psychology of Middle Power: Vertical Code-Switching, Role Conflict, and Behavioral Inhibition
    統計値
    Middle-power positions create chronic vertical code-switching demands, role conflict, and behavioural inhibition — mechanisms that compound stress and predict reduced wellbeing among middle managers
    抜粋
    “"[Paraphrase from abstract — full text paywalled] Middle-power actors must alternate between behavioural patterns directed toward higher-power and lower-power interaction partners ('vertical code-switching'); this code-switching, combined with chronic role conflict and behavioural inhibition, predicts heightened cognitive depletion and reduced wellbeing among middle managers." ”
    出典データ
    2017-10-01
    アクセス日
    2026-05-30
    計算過程
    Anicich and Hirsh (2017), Academy of Management Review 42(4), 659-682, and their 2017 Harvard Business Review article "Why Being a Middle Manager Is So Exhausting" (March 2017). Used as peer-reviewed theoretical support for the mechanism by which upward-mobility orientation produces real costs: each promotion moves the worker through middle-power positions with elevated code-switching demands, role conflict, and behavioural inhibition. Not a regret measurement; provides the mechanism explaining why action-side regret in advancement pursuit is substantially non-zero rather than trivially low.

出典: 不作為

根拠台帳

以下の各数値は各出典が報告した内容であり、引用した原文の抜粋と算出方法を記載しています。リンクをクリックして直接確認できます。

  1. [1] Resume Now (International Career Regrets Survey) — The Road Not Taken: Greatest Career Regrets Revealed
    The Road Not Taken: Greatest Career Regrets Revealed

    See all 8 Likelier entries citing this source →

    統計値
    51% of workers regret not asking for a promotion; 60% regret not asking for a pay increase; 58% regret staying at a job too long
    抜粋
    “"Top career regrets include not asking for a pay increase (60%), not prioritising work-life balance (59%), staying at a job too long (58%), and not negotiating salary when taking a job (58%). 51% regret not asking for a promotion." ”
    出典データ
    2024-03-01
    アクセス日
    2026-05-30
    計算過程
    Resume Now International Career Regrets Survey of 1,000 workers across the US, UK, France, and Germany, fielded January 2024. The 51% headline is directly reported. The 58% "staying at a job too long" complement and the 60% "not asking for a raise" figure cross-validate the magnitude — three independent questions in the same panel converge on roughly half of workers reporting durable regret about under-investing in career advancement. Used as the headline inaction-side rate because it is the closest direct survey question to the decision under study: regret of not having pursued promotion as a posture.
  2. [2] Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (Roese & Summerville) — What We Regret Most ... and Why
    What We Regret Most ... and Why

    See all 14 Likelier entries citing this source →

    統計値
    Career ranks second of six domains in lifetime regret (22.3% of biggest regrets); inaction regrets persist longer than action regrets
    抜粋
    “"People's biggest regrets are a reflection of where in life they see their largest opportunities; that is, where they see tangible prospects for change, growth, and renewal." ”
    出典データ
    2005-09-01
    アクセス日
    2026-05-30
    計算過程
    Roese & Summerville (2005), PSPB 31(9), 1273-1285. Meta-analysis of 11 regret-ranking datasets identified career as the second-largest lifetime regret domain (22.3%), after education (32.2%) and before romance (14.8%). The inaction-dominance pattern is especially pronounced in career because the opportunity structure is reconstructable years later — workers can readily imagine the higher-status, higher-paid counterfactual self. Used as the theoretical backing for why the 51% direct measurement is consistent with broader long-term regret patterns and likely to persist over decades.

注意事項

このペアは、単一のイベントではなく、年月にわたる慢性的な上向きの 流動性志向の姿勢についてである。companion ペアの `ask-for-raise- vs-wait` は単一の交渉をカバーする。このエントリは維持された スタンスをカバーする。行動側の27%は代理構築である。「あなたは 昇進を追求したことを後悔しているか」を直接尋ねた調査は存在しない。 推定は、38%の「会議で発言したことを後悔」信号(上向きの主張の 単一インスタンスが約4対10の頻度で裏目に出る)を、59%の「ワーク ライフバランスを優先しなかったことを後悔」データポイントと 組み合わせる。これは、意味のある割合の追求者がバランスを向上と 引き換えにし、そのトレードを後悔として再構築することを示唆する。 Anicich-Hirshの中間管理職研究は、行動側の後悔率が実質的に非ゼロで ある理由の査読済みメカニズムを提供する。各段階は労働者を慢性的な コードスイッチング、役割葛藤、行動抑制を伴う中間権力ポジション に移動させる。51%の不行動側率は直接測定されているが、一度尋ね なかったことの後悔と上向きの流動性姿勢を維持しなかったことの 後悔を混同している。これらは異なる可能性がある。Resume Now パネルでの質問横断的一貫性 (51%昇進、60%昇給、58%長く留まりすぎ) は、約半数の労働者が向上への投資不足について耐久性のある後悔を 抱えていることを示唆し、モーダルな後悔は不行動側である。選択 バイアスは現実である。昇進を追求して成功した労働者はコストを 合理化する。追求して失敗した労働者は、パネルが捕捉するよりも 高い行動側の後悔を示す可能性がある。24ポイントのギャップは Roese-Summervilleのキャリア領域不行動優位と方向的に一致するが、 正確な大きさは調査設計の注意事項を伴う。難問は文脈にわたって 異なる。介護需要の低い初期キャリア労働者の計算は、扶養家族の バランスを取る中年の親のそれとは異なる。Resume Nowは産業界が 資金提供するパネルであり学術的調査ではなく、利用可能な唯一の 直接測定である。不行動優位の方向性については査読済みの裏付けが 存在するが、見出し率については存在しない。

生データ: /api/decisions.json

このデバイスで最近見た項目