You sit down to finally read that long-ignored paper, prep your strategy deck for next week’s funders’ meeting, or check in with a junior colleague who’s been visibly off their game. Then your inbox pings. Again. The meeting you didn’t ask for gets rescheduled. Again. And before you know it, it’s 5:30pm and the “real” work hasn’t even begun.
Sound familiar?
For many people stepping into leadership roles, whether in research or industry, time management for scientists quickly becomes less about to-do lists and more about an existential crisis. The daily pull between your technical expertise and your human responsibilities can feel like trying to conduct fieldwork in a storm: disorienting, messy, and entirely out of your control.
But what if the problem isn’t just time management for scientists? What if what’s really getting in the way isn’t your calendar at all?
Why Time Management Fails Us in Leadership
Scientists are taught early to manage complex variables, juggle long-term projects, and think in systems. And yet, when it comes to leading people, mentoring, vision-setting and influencing across silos, many mid-career scientists find themselves without a map.
This isn’t a personal failing. It’s a mismatch between the kind of problems we’re trained to solve and the kind of complexity leadership demands. Time management tools, task lists, time blocking and email triage are designed for complicated problems. Leadership is complex.
In a complex system (like, say, a multidisciplinary research team with funding pressures, personality clashes, and shifting policy landscapes), there are no clear right answers. Solutions emerge over time. That means the things that often feel like “interruptions”, unclear goals, emotional tensions and resistance, are actually the work of leadership.
Which means the first step in reclaiming your time may be to rethink what counts as valuable work.
Reframing the “Real Work”
For senior scientists, there’s often an identity tension: Am I still a scientist if I’m not publishing as much? If I spend more time in people issues than in the data?
It’s understandable. You didn’t earn your stripes by sitting in HR meetings. But as you move into leadership, influence becomes your instrument. That’s not a betrayal of your science, it’s a deepening of your role in it.
Take Professor Dame Julia Slingo, who served as Chief Scientist at the UK Met Office from 2009 to 2016. Slingo began her career as a physicist and atmospheric scientist, but her leadership impact came not just from her research, but from her ability to champion collaboration across disciplines, advocate for the integration of climate science into policy, and nurture a culture of innovation within large, complex institutions.
In interviews, she’s spoken candidly about the importance of aligning scientific ambition with societal need, and how that often requires stepping back from the lab bench to build relationships, manage competing priorities, and navigate political terrain. Her legacy shows that leadership in science is not about “leaving the science behind”, but about amplifying its reach through strategic influence.
The Hidden Block: Psychological Safety and Sensemaking
So what’s really consuming time for leaders in science? One overlooked factor is sensemaking, the process of trying to understand ambiguous or fast-changing situations, especially when emotions or values are involved.
If you’ve ever spent hours trying to decode why two senior colleagues won’t align, or why a once-promising team has stalled, it’s not because you’re inefficient. It’s because sensemaking is slow. And because it often happens in contexts where psychological safety is low.
Psychological safety, the belief that one can speak up, make mistakes, or disagree without fear of humiliation, is foundational to effective teams. But it’s also something leaders have to create, not just expect.
Creating safety takes presence, clarity, and a willingness to sit with uncertainty. It can feel nebulous, even indulgent. But according to Google’s landmark Project Aristotle, psychological safety was the most important factor in high-performing teams, even more than technical expertise.
In other words: the time you spend listening, clarifying, aligning, that’s not “soft stuff.” It’s performance infrastructure.
Letting Go of the Guilt
One barrier we often see in our leadership coaching sessions is guilt. Scientists in leadership feel pulled in ten directions and worry they’re letting everyone down, colleagues, teams, even their past selves as “productive” researchers.
But productivity isn’t the same as impact. You can’t calendar your way out of complexity, or delegate emotional labour to Outlook. What you can do is reorient your attention:
- Instead of asking: “How can I get through my to-do list?”
- Try asking: “What needs my leadership today?”
It’s a small shift, but a powerful one. And over time, it builds the kind of leadership presence that makes science more sustainable, equitable, and effective.
Rethinking Time Management for Scientists Isn’t a Solo Mission
This isn’t about working harder or faster. It’s about working differently, and with support. Many leaders in science benefit from reflective spaces where they can process, reframe, and refocus.
That’s where leadership coaching comes in. Coaching isn’t about quick fixes. It’s about slowing down to see more clearly. To lead not just with your head, but with your humanity.
Final Reflection
If you’re feeling the crunch, not just in your schedule, but in your thinking, you’re not alone. Rethinking time management for scientists isn’t easy. But it’s one of the most powerful moves a science leader can make.
Next time you find yourself buried in admin or avoiding yet another awkward team conversation, pause. Ask: What’s really getting in the way?
And if you’d like a space to explore that question more deeply, or for more guidance on time management for scientists, we’re here.
