168 Hours: Revisited

Dr Elizabeth Blakelock

All right, let’s get into it. Today I want to talk about this idea I keep coming back to—what I call “humanist productivity.” Basically, it’s my own way of challenging the whole hustle-24/7 narrative. Instead of, you know, treating ourselves like machines, the focus is on authenticity, connection, and sustainability. And when I say authenticity, I really mean aiming for integration over perfection. Connection? That’s community over individualism. And sustainability, well, that’s resilience instead of just pushing until we burn out. That’s the framework.

Dr Elizabeth Blakelock

Now, I first started using these ideas for survival more than self-improvement. I can actually pinpoint it—maybe not to the day, but close!—to the very start of my life as a solo parent. I’d just come back from maternity leave and, honestly, time felt like this impossible riddle. I was dealing with chronic pain, brand new parenthood, paid work, all in one go. And I didn’t need more motivation, if I’m being blunt. I needed clarity—something to anchor myself.

Dr Elizabeth Blakelock

Which brings me—probably very predictably—to Laura Vanderkam’s “168 Hours.” I think I mentioned before, this book is one of the few productivity guides that’s properly stuck with me. And I think the timing mattered. I bought it only a couple weeks after heading back to work with a tiny baby at home and absolutely no margin for, well, anything.

Dr Elizabeth Blakelock

The heart of the book is actually sort of radical, but quietly so. Laura asks, how are you spending your actual time? Not in theory, but in the granular detail of week-to-week life. By tracking your time—literally, tracking it—you swap out self-judgment for real information. Instead of spiraling into “Why can’t I cope?” you’re asking “Wait—where’s my time really going?” It’s subtle, but especially if your energy wobbles or you’re juggling a million things, that shift is huge.

Dr Elizabeth Blakelock

This method meant I could spot the space to dedicate one day each week to my doctorate—no more, but also no less—without feeling like I was failing at everything else. It’s not about squeezing in more, or optimizing every second. It’s about knowing your reality and finding what works within it. I honestly don’t think I would have finished my PhD without this kind of clarity.

Dr Elizabeth Blakelock

What’s more—oh, this is important—Vanderkam is fairly generous with her work. Templates, trackers, all sorts of practical bits—she makes them accessible, which matters if money or bandwidth are tight. That feels profoundly humanist to me; there’s no secret club, it’s shared knowledge.

Dr Elizabeth Blakelock

It also lines up with this idea of designing your time around your truth, rather than someone else’s ideal. For me, that was the invitation I needed—to make my days reflect my actual life, not a Pinterest vision board version.

Dr Elizabeth Blakelock

But, and there’s always a but, right? The 168 Hours method, for all its strengths, isn’t a universal solve. I’m aware—and I say this as someone with a fair bit of control over my own schedule now—it works best for people in similar positions of autonomy. A lot of us, and I’m including my past self in this, don’t really have that luxury, especially if your job or life is dictated by someone else’s rota, or there’s no flex at all.

Dr Elizabeth Blakelock

So, while it was actionable for me, I do think the book sometimes tiptoes around the real constraints a lot of folks face. There’s this risk—you know, if we’re not careful—that it sounds like, “Well, if you’re out of sync, that’s on you,” when actually the system might be rigged in ways you can’t just fix with a new planner. There’s a humanist takeaway here: time awareness is powerful, but time control isn’t equally distributed.

Dr Elizabeth Blakelock

Now, let’s pivot a bit to “Tranquility by Tuesday,” which for me feels like Vanderkam’s more reflective, more human take on all this. The vibe shifts from cramming everything in, to shaping time for what we actually care about—especially outside of work. It treats rest, hobbies, and even joy as essentials that deserve to be planned in. Not, you know, something you only get if you’ve ticked off every other box.

Dr Elizabeth Blakelock

There are nine recommendations in the book—don’t worry, I won’t subject you to all nine right now. But two that hit home for me: “Three times a week is a habit,” which is honestly such a relief after decades of hearing you have to do things daily to count—and “two adventures a week, one big, one small.” That last one transformed how I use time with my son. We started doing little trips—visiting local nature reserves, or sometimes going big, like heading to London to watch a favourite movie transformed into an amazing theatre experience.

Dr Elizabeth Blakelock

And this idea of shaping time, building in joy and memory, it’s not just a “nice to have.” If I’ve learned anything through chronic pain and parenting, it’s this: rest isn’t a reward, and connection makes everything more sustainable.

Dr Elizabeth Blakelock

Still—even though Vanderkam gets a lot right in both books, there’s a gap she sort of names but doesn’t fill. Both “168 Hours” and “Tranquility by Tuesday” reference the negotiations required—at work, at home, wherever—to claim time for ourselves. But what’s missing is the actual toolkit for those negotiations, especially if you don’t have power or you’re always the one flexing for everyone else.

Dr Elizabeth Blakelock

For disabled parents, carers, anyone with less autonomy, just asking for flexibility or support can be like a second job. There’s invisible labor there—navigating, explaining, justifying—that doesn’t get captured in any tracker.

Dr Elizabeth Blakelock

Humanist productivity clicked because it didn’t ask me to ignore my limits or do it all alone. Instead, it gave me permission to integrate what actually mattered to me into every messy, unpredictable day. And I suppose that’s sort of the throughline I want to follow today—how we can keep things human, make space for our real priorities, and avoid getting swallowed up by relentless “shoulds.”

Dr Elizabeth Blakelock

So, from a humanist lens, I think the next challenge for sustainable productivity isn’t just personal insight, but collective strategies. We need ways to build real agreement, real change—tools for negotiating, not just intentions to use our time better. It isn’t enough to just wish for connection; it’s something we construct, together, with consent and support.

Dr Elizabeth Blakelock

Thank you for joining me here on Periodically Productive—a small space for big reflections. Until next time, I hope your hours are filled with purpose, and your days are shaped by what matters most to you. I’ll see you next time.