For most of the last century, retirement had a fixed shape. You worked until a certain age, usually somewhere around 65, and then you stopped. It was a single door that opened once, and once you walked through it, that was that.
That model is quietly falling apart, and almost nobody is talking about it directly. Fewer people are asking when they should retire. More are asking how do I know when I'm ready to retire, a question that has less to do with a specific age than most people assume.
The reasons are practical. People are living longer, often healthier, and the idea of doing nothing for twenty or thirty years sounds less like a reward and more like a risk. At the same time, careers have gotten messier. Layoffs, industry shifts, caregiving responsibilities, and burnout all interrupt the tidy "work until X, then retire" script long before anyone planned for it.
Phased retirement is one version of this shift. Instead of a hard stop, some people are stepping down gradually, cutting to part-time hours, consulting, or seasonal work for a few years before fully stepping away. It softens the transition and gives people time to figure out what they actually want their days to look like, rather than making that decision all at once under pressure.
Others are going the opposite direction. A growing number of people are choosing to retire earlier than expected, sometimes by a decade or more, and then returning to some form of paid work a few years later, not because they ran out of money, but because they missed the structure or the sense of contribution. Retirement, for them, wasn't an ending. It was a pause.
None of this means the old model is wrong for everyone. Plenty of people still want a clean, defined finish line, and there is nothing outdated about that. But treating a specific age as the deciding factor is becoming less useful as a planning tool. What matters more is whether someone has actually thought through what comes after the paycheck stops, not just whether they have hit a particular birthday or a round number in a savings account.
There's also a generational piece to this. Many people watched a parent or grandparent retire at a fixed age, only to spend the next two decades figuring things out as they went. That experience has made younger pre-retirees more skeptical of the idea that a single date solves anything. They've seen firsthand that the real adjustment happens once the daily structure disappears, not before it.
That distinction is worth sitting with, because it changes the question people should be asking themselves. Instead of "how many years until I retire," a more honest question might be "what would actually have to be true for me to feel ready right now." That question doesn't have a universal answer, and it isn't purely financial. It touches on health, identity, relationships, and what a person actually plans to do with their time, in addition to the numbers.
This is exactly the kind of thinking that financial planner Kevin Lum works through with clients every week. In a recent breakdown, he lays out how he actually helps people answer that question, moving past the assumption that a savings target alone tells the whole story. It's a useful read for anyone who suspects the traditional timeline no longer fits their situation, but isn't sure what should replace it.
The bigger shift here isn't about picking a new age to aim for. It's about accepting that retirement is less of a single event and more of an ongoing decision, one that can be revisited, adjusted, and rethought as circumstances change. For anyone who has assumed there's a "right" year written down somewhere, waiting to be reached, that assumption is probably the first thing worth questioning.
Figuring out how I know I'm ready to retire has less to do with the calendar than most people think, and more to do with asking better questions before you get there.
Copyright © 2026 California Business Journal. All Rights Reserved.
For California Business Journal Disclaimers, go to /terms-conditions/.