{"id":9596,"date":"2017-09-15T04:45:35","date_gmt":"2017-09-15T09:45:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/michaelhyatt.com\/?p=9596"},"modified":"2017-09-15T04:45:35","modified_gmt":"2017-09-15T09:45:35","slug":"five-consequences-of-a-life-out-of-balance","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fullfocus.co\/five-consequences-of-a-life-out-of-balance\/","title":{"rendered":"Five Consequences of a Life Out of Balance"},"content":{"rendered":"

If you are working more than 55 hours a week, you are working too much and likely out of balance. You may be able to keep this up for a season, but it is not sustainable.<\/p>\n\n

In fact, if you keep working so much, something will eventually break. And the sooner you come to terms with this, the better.<\/p>\n

When Norms are Bad<\/h3>\n

Rebecca Zucker was an investment banker at Goldman Sachs in the 1990s. Her bosses considered Zucker the \u201cideal worker,\u201d because she was \u201ca fully committed employee with no personal \u2018entanglements.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n

Zucker was \u201csingle with no children, and had an almost unlimited capacity for all things related to work.\u201d However, she reflects<\/a> in Harvard Business Review<\/em>, \u201cso did my peers, whether or not they had children, partners, or aging parents. It was just the industry and firm norm.\u201d<\/p>\n

She eventually learned how unhealthy that was. Now, as an executive coach, she tries to help leaders find balance. It\u2019s not easy.<\/p>\n

One client at a tech firm in San Francisco told Zucker that she gets up at 4 a.m. to work, but it\u2019s not enough. She still \u201chas anxiety about the possibility of missing an email at midnight.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cIs this normal?\u201d the client asked Zucker, who rightly responded that even if it is<\/em> normal for this company, it shouldn\u2019t be.<\/p>\n\n

What\u2019s at Risk<\/h3>\n

I teach high achievers how to reject workaholism<\/a> and find balance, but sometimes people push back and ask why they should even want balance. Won\u2019t it just keep them from getting ahead?<\/p>\n

I get it. I\u2019ve been there. But let me show you the 5 very important assets you are potentially putting at risk if you don\u2019t keep your normal workload under 55 hours a week:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Your health.<\/strong> Overwork and the lifestyle that goes with it, including junk food and lots of sitting<\/a>, is incredibly bad for you over the long haul. How many people do you know who have died young simply because they refused to take care of themselves? You don\u2019t want to be one of them.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n
  2. Your family.<\/strong> If you are married, the cost of divorce is incalculable. Just ask those who have gone through one. Overwork will drive you toward that. It will also leave you little time to pay attention to your children, which can lead to crises that you\u2019ll have to deal with later.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n
  3. \n

    Your friends.<\/strong> When I was a workaholic, I thought I could get by with colleagues at work and people I knew at church. It wasn\u2019t enough. Since then, I have learned that friendships are wonderful, but they take time to maintain. Overwork eats away at the margin needed for deep friendships.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  4. \n

    Your effectiveness.<\/strong> You are most productive for only a limited amount of time each day and the stress of overwork narrows that time. Past a certain point, the number of hours you work has almost zero correlation with your productivity. So, you\u2019re giving your time, and getting very little in return.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  5. \n

    Your example.<\/strong> As a leader, you set the pace<\/a>. If you work 70 hours a week, your people will think they have to work 70 hours a week. Most of them won\u2019t be able to keep up. And you won\u2019t like the consequences.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\t\t