“Busyness is not the same as productivity.”
It’s an uncomfortable truth in many organisations. We reward activity more than impact. We confuse full calendars with effective leadership. We treat responsiveness as value. Somewhere along the way, the measure of success became how stretched someone is, not what they actually deliver.
I’ve lived this. I’ve fallen into it. That sense of importance you get from being needed constantly. The dopamine hit of every new meeting request, every red flag email, every late-night message. But eventually you realise: this isn’t leadership. It’s reaction. And it’s costing you more than time.
The Myth of High-Performing Busyness
There’s a myth in modern work culture that being busy is a badge of honour. We’ve romanticised hustle, glorified the grind. But what’s really happening?
Cal Newport’s concept of “deep work” shows that focus, not speed or multitasking, is what drives meaningful output. Productivityists like David Allen argue for clarity of mind as the foundation of performance. And thinkers like Greg McKeown remind us that if everything is a priority, nothing is.
Yet busyness persists. Partly because it’s visible. It’s easy to demonstrate. Busy leaders look committed. Available. Essential. But that visibility hides a truth. Some of the most effective leaders I know are almost invisible in the day-to-day. Not because they’re absent. Because they’ve designed for clarity. They’ve built teams that don’t depend on them for every decision. They protect time, rather than fill it.
There’s a parallel here to what I explored in Are You Leading Through Clarity or Assumption? In both cases, it’s not the lack of action that undermines effectiveness. It’s the lack of intention. Leaders fill their time with what looks urgent, or make assumptions about alignment, and rarely pause to test whether their effort is driving outcomes.
What Are You Actually Delivering?
This is the question I keep coming back to. What is the outcome of your effort?
Too often we optimise schedules instead of strategy. We review diaries but never priorities. We feel exhausted but unsure what we’ve achieved. There’s a difference between working all day and making progress.
As Drucker famously put it, “There is nothing so useless as doing efficiently that which should not be done at all.”
I’ve had weeks where every moment was accounted for. And yet the work that mattered most was left untouched. It reminds me of the reflections I shared in What You Don’t Know Is Leading You. Blind spots, not capacity, are often what limit leaders. Busyness, in a sense, can be its own blind spot. We focus on the visible while neglecting the meaningful.
When I reflect on my own practice, I’ve had to learn, often the hard way, that leadership means protecting attention, not just managing time. It means saying no to work that looks important but adds no value. And it means being brave enough to focus, even when the world is demanding breadth.
Saying No Without Guilt
This one matters. We teach leaders to influence, to coach, to strategise. But we rarely teach them how to say no.
It’s an emotional skill. Especially in the third sector or volunteer-led environments where every request feels worthy. Every meeting feels necessary. But time isn’t unlimited. And attention, once fractured, takes energy to restore.
Boundaries aren’t selfish. They’re strategic. The best leaders I know decline more than they accept. Not because they don’t care. Because they care about the right things.
There’s overlap here with the clarity post again. Boundaries aren’t just about time. They’re about communication. When you say no with intention, you clarify what matters. You set expectations. You help others prioritise too.
We need to stop equating presence with performance. Stop applauding burnout as commitment. And stop believing that visibility is the same as value.
Reflecting on My Own Practice
I’ve had seasons where I said yes to everything. Where I ran at full speed because slowing down felt like letting people down. But I’ve learned that poor prioritisation isn’t just bad for delivery. It’s bad for trust. Because when you commit to too much, you underdeliver. And when you’re stretched too thin, you lead from exhaustion, not insight.
Now I try to start the week with two questions. What matters most this week? And what will I say no to in order to protect it?
I don’t always get it right. But it’s shifted how I think. And it’s helped the teams I lead know that their time matters too.
Theory in Practice
Here are a few models and thinkers that shape this view.
- Essentialism – the disciplined pursuit of less (McKeown, 2014)
- Deep Work – value through focus, not speed (Newport, 2016)
- Getting Things Done – stress-free productivity through clarity (Allen, 2001)
- Time Management Matrix – distinguishing urgent from important (Covey, 1989)
- Attention Economy – attention is a finite resource (Davenport and Beck, 2001)
- Decision Fatigue – cognitive depletion from excessive choice (Baumeister, 2011)
- Deliberate Practice – quality over repetition (Ericsson, 1993)
Not all voices agree, of course. Some argue that productivity culture creates unrealistic expectations of efficiency and self-discipline. Critics of time blocking, for instance, suggest it over-engineers natural rhythms. Others point out that for many frontline workers or public servants, busyness isn’t a choice. It’s a structural reality.
That’s true. But even then, leaders have a role to play in helping their teams find focus within chaos. To question what truly needs doing. To protect space for thinking, not just doing.
InterThread 
Leave a comment