Board Governance, Life Balance and Leading with Values | Pete Henderson Society
Why It Matters
By reframing time management as a leadership competency, executives can boost productivity, reduce burnout, and make more value‑adding decisions for their boards and companies.
Key Takeaways
- •Focus on life balance, not just work‑life balance, to align priorities.
- •Everyone has 168 hours weekly; allocate them intentionally through self‑reflection.
- •Write down priorities; without documentation you’ll mistake activity for productivity.
- •Sleep, health, and relationships are non‑negotiable foundations for effective leadership.
- •Leaders must delegate routine tasks, preserving time for strategic, purpose‑driven work.
Summary
Professor Harry Kramer, former Baxter CEO and Kellogg professor, led a Pete Henderson Society webinar on board governance, life balance and values‑based leadership. He challenged the conventional “work‑life balance” mantra, urging executives to think in terms of overall life balance and purposeful use of time.
Kramer reminded participants that everyone has exactly 168 hours each week. By breaking those hours into six “buckets” – career, education, family, faith, health and contribution – leaders can assess where they truly spend time. He warned that high activity levels often mask low productivity, and that self‑reflection is essential to distinguish the two.
Memorable moments included his “I’m surprised you’re surprised” retort to executives who blame fatigue on overwork, the anecdote of a CEO asking “what’s 168?” and a golf‑time illustration showing how personal choices consume valuable hours. He also highlighted the habit of writing down priorities as a simple yet powerful tool.
The takeaway for board members and senior managers is clear: intentional scheduling, adequate sleep, exercise and relationship time are non‑negotiable, and delegating routine tasks frees bandwidth for strategic, purpose‑driven decisions. Adopting this mindset can improve personal well‑being while enhancing governance effectiveness and organizational performance.
Comments
Want to join the conversation?
Loading comments...