The way a chief executive structures their day reflects where an organisation places its weight. PwC’s 29th Global CEO Survey, drawing on responses from 4,454 chief executives across 95 countries, provides a detailed picture of how executive attention is currently distributed.

On average, leaders report spending 47% of their time on issues requiring resolution within the year. A further 37% is devoted to medium-term priorities spanning one to five years, while 16% is reserved for longer-term considerations beyond five years.

For UK executives operating in a mature, highly regulated, and internationally exposed market, this distribution reflects a familiar reality. Immediate operational delivery, stakeholder scrutiny, and risk management naturally command attention. The question is not whether short-term focus is necessary, but how effectively leaders create space alongside it for sustained strategic positioning.

Encouragingly, the survey shows that organisations which continue to invest leadership time in long-term priorities, despite short-term pressures, tend to achieve stronger performance outcomes.

National Approaches to Long-Term Leadership Focus

The survey highlights clear differences in how executive time is allocated across regions. Chief executives on the Chinese Mainland report spending 28% of their time on issues extending beyond five years, compared with 11% for their counterparts in the UK, the US, and Brazil.

At the shorter end of the spectrum, Chinese Mainland leaders allocate 24% of their time to issues requiring attention within the year. By contrast, UK chief executives report spending 55% of their time on near-term matters, broadly aligned with the US at 54%, Brazil at 57%, and Germany at 49%.

These variations reflect structural and cultural differences rather than simple strategic preference. UK executives operate within governance frameworks that place strong emphasis on risk management, regulatory compliance, and near-term accountability. This naturally increases short-term demands on leadership time.

Germany sits between these approaches, with 49% of executive time focused on short-term issues and 15% on long-term priorities, illustrating that different balances can be effective depending on market structure and institutional context.

For UK leaders, the takeaway is not to emulate other models wholesale, but to recognise that time allocation is a strategic variable. Even within demanding environments, deliberate choices about where leadership attention is directed can influence long-term outcomes.

Ownership Structures and Time Discipline

Ownership models also shape executive focus. Private equity-backed organisations show the strongest short-term orientation, with chief executives spending 57% of their time on issues requiring resolution within the year. This aligns with PE investment horizons, which typically prioritise operational improvement and value creation within defined timeframes.

Interestingly, other privately owned companies also demonstrate a pronounced short-term focus, allocating 51% of executive time to immediate priorities, compared with 39% for public company leaders. This challenges the assumption that private ownership inherently enables longer-term thinking.

Public company chief executives report the most balanced allocation overall. They dedicate 41% of their time to medium-term priorities and 20% to issues beyond five years, the highest proportion across ownership types.

For UK-listed companies, this reflects the evolving expectations of boards and investors. While delivery remains critical, there is growing recognition that long-term resilience, capability building, and strategic clarity underpin sustainable performance.

Aligning Awareness with Focus

One of the survey’s more useful insights relates to leaders who place a strong emphasis on long-term viability. These chief executives report spending a greater share of their time on short-term issues than those who express lower levels of concern.

This does not suggest a lack of long-term intent, in many organisations, improving long-term resilience starts with stabilising current performance. Immediate operational, financial, or regulatory matters often need to be addressed before deeper change can be tackled effectively.

The findings suggest that alongside long-term awareness, progress depends on how executive time is deliberately structured. Organisations facing structural or competitive challenges benefit most when short-term actions are clearly linked to longer-term objectives, ensuring that near-term decisions support, rather than delay, strategic renewal.

The strongest organisations treat short and long-term priorities as linked, rather than competing. Boards and leadership teams that protect time for future-focused work, while maintaining operational stability, are better positioned to turn long-term ambition into lasting change.

Creating Investment Momentum

Geopolitical uncertainty remains a material concern for business leaders. According to the survey, 32% of chief executives say it makes them less likely to pursue significant new investments. In the UK context, this caution reflects exposure to global trade, regulatory divergence, and supply chain complexity.

However, the data also highlights the performance implications of prolonged investment restraint. The 15% of organisations whose leaders say geopolitical uncertainty is limiting major investments, and who are not planning significant acquisitions over the next three years, grow two percentage points more slowly than their peers. Their profit margins are also three percentage points lower.

These findings suggest that disciplined investment, rather than disengagement, is a source of competitive advantage during periods of uncertainty. UK organisations with strong governance and clear strategic priorities are often best placed to continue investing selectively while managing risk.

Maintaining Balance

High-performing chief executives are able to move comfortably between immediate demands and longer-term priorities. They deal with day-to-day operational issues without allowing them to overwhelm the strategic work that shapes future performance.

This balance is deliberate rather than accidental. Clear delegation reduces the need for senior leaders to step into routine issues, while good calendar discipline, including protected time for strategic thinking, helps ensure long-term priorities remain in focus.

In the UK, boards play an important role in supporting this balance. Regular strategy discussions that are clearly linked to longer-term objectives, not just near-term results, help reinforce leadership attention on transformation, resilience, and sustained performance.

Effective Time Allocation in Practice

While 47% of executive time devoted to short-term matters is common, the wide variation across regions and ownership structures shows that time allocation is not fixed. It is a strategic choice shaped by organisational design and leadership intent.

UK chief executives who spend 60% or more of their time on immediate issues, while identifying long-term transformation as a priority, may benefit from reviewing how responsibilities are structured across their leadership teams.

Strong operational capability allows organisations to sustain performance without constant executive intervention. This, in turn, frees senior leaders to invest time in strategic positioning, capability development, and future growth.

Time is An Asset

PwC’s findings reinforce a simple but powerful idea: executive time is a finite and valuable resource with direct performance implications. Organisations that protect leadership focus on long-term priorities, even amid short-term pressure, consistently outperform those that do not.

For UK executives, the challenge is not choosing between short-term delivery and long-term vision, but designing organisations that can do both. Governance structures, leadership capability, and disciplined prioritisation all play a role.

Time allocation deserves explicit attention at board and executive level. When treated as a strategic asset rather than a reactive outcome, it becomes a powerful lever for building resilience, competitiveness, and sustained value creation.