People in power need more than a power nap

Would you elect someone to lead your country if they were working under the influence of alcohol?

Probably not.

Yet, in some cases, the reality may not be so different.

Sleep deprivation has been shown to produce effects comparable to intoxication. After around 18 hours awake, performance can be compared to a blood alcohol level of 0.05%. At 24 hours, it reaches roughly 0.1% - over the legal driving limit in the UK.

Despite this, operating in that state has often been worn as a badge of honour. It has been glamourised, both historically and today. The true impact of that mindset will never be fully known. But when you look at the short term effects alone, it becomes hard to ignore the possibility that sleep deprivation has shaped history itself.

Leaders on Little Sleep

Keir Starmer

This article was prompted by a recent headline about Keir Starmer:

“Worried MPs say he is not sleeping and they have recently noticed him online on his phone in the early hours…”

This comes after a media scandal, which is thought to be what is keeping him up.

That gives a very clear example of how public attention can make it even harder to switch off.

And that could cause a vicious cycle - the more negative attention, the harder it is to sleep, the worse the performance, the more negative attention.

Interestingly, Starmer has previously spoken about protecting his personal time, even drawing a firm line at 6pm on Fridays to spend time with family. The fact that this is headline worthy says a lot. Needing to switch off should not be unusual. It should be the norm. However this was stated back in 2024 - I wonder if he is finding time now?

Margaret Thatcher

Margaret Thatcher famously said, “Sleep is for wimps.”

There have been claims that she carried a rare gene variant (DEC2), sometimes linked to shorter sleep. But even in those cases, it does not eliminate the need for sleep. It may only help people function slightly better on less of it.

No one has been shown to perform at their best on fewer than six hours. Thatcher was reportedly getting closer to four.

While her stamina was often praised, some of her team suggested she was frequently exhausted. Her limited sleep may also have been part of a performance - a way to show a woman’s resilience in a male dominated environment.

Has this kind of messaging helped turn low sleep into a symbol of strength? And in doing so, has it misled people into thinking they can function optimally on far less than they actually need?

Donald Trump

Donald Trump has often claimed to sleep very little:

“I’m not a big sleeper. I like three hours, four hours…”

He has also described longer sleepers as lazy.

Yet there are numerous recent reports of him appearing drowsy or falling asleep in meetings. Maybe it’s time he considered being a bit more "lazy".

Winston Churchill

Winston Churchill took a different approach (probably my favourite).

He typically slept around five hours at night, followed by a two hour nap in the late afternoon. This biphasic pattern allowed him to work late into the evening, whilst still being able to focus.

By napping long enough to complete a full sleep cycle, he likely gained some restorative benefit. So his approach was more strategic than it might first appear. Intentional or not.

That said, this structure is still not optimal for overall sleep quality. It increases the risk of missing out on REM sleep, which plays a key role in processing emotions and making memories.

Even so, given the demands of his role, his system wasn’t half bad.

However, we shan’t discuss whisky’s effect on sleep today.

Even if they wanted to sleep more…

Being in a position of power is far from easy.

High stress and constant cognitive demand are part of the job. And both are known to disrupt sleep. To fall asleep and stay asleep, the body needs to downshift. Cortisol levels must drop. Brain activity must slow. And that becomes a lot more difficult when the spotlight is on your decisions, and they have global consequences.

Then there is travel.

Frequent time zone changes disrupt circadian rhythms. It takes about one day to adjust for every hour of time difference. There are strategies that can speed up this process, but without them leaders can spend large portions of their schedule in a state of misalignment.

Even sleeping in unfamiliar environments can make an impact. The brain remains more alert in new settings - sometimes referred to as the “first-night effect.” Familiar cues such as bedding or scent can help.

With the scale of responsibility involved, the size of their teams, and the overwhelming evidence for the importance of sleep, you would hope strategies are in place to mitigate these effects. However, in politics, it seems sleep has so far been discussed more dismissively than seriously.

Why does it matter?

Because this is the job.

Leaders are there to make decisions. Big ones. Constantly.

And sleep has a direct impact on how good those decisions are.

Get less sleep, and you become more impulsive, seek more risks, and worse at learning from mistakes. In complex tasks, well rested people have been shown to perform up to three times better than those who are sleep deprived.

That is the difference between getting it right and getting it very wrong.

Then there is emotion.

The less you sleep, the more emotionally reactive you become. The part of the brain that looks for threats becomes more sensitive, while the part that keeps it in check becomes less effective.

If high emotions weren’t in the equation - what might be handled differently?

An extra 10 minutes of sleep is unlikely to solve everything. But it could be the difference between a good decision and a disastrous one.

Should leaders be tested on their sleep?

In an ideal world, maybe.

Imagine election campaigns where, alongside policies and promises, you also saw data on performance and recovery. It sounds ridiculous, but it might tell you more about how someone will actually perform in the role.

Realistically, it is not going to happen. Asking world leaders to wear sleep trackers and share that data publicly is a stretch. Maybe in my dreams. It would be incredibly interesting.

But even without that, the conversation matters.

Poor sleep is rarely taken seriously - sometimes even praised. If sleep starts to be seen as part of the job rather than separate from it, leaders might feel more able to prioritise it.

And that doesn't just apply to politics.

Everybody is a leader in their own world. Whether as the CEO of a FTSE 500 company, a coach for your local sports team, or a parent, prioritising sleep is a great place to start if you want that leadership to be legendary.