How many projects are too many?

After years of building systems and automations to streamline how I manage projects, I’ve finally hit a biological limit: cognitive overload.

My recent experience has taught me that no matter how efficient you become, there’s a hard limit to how many projects a single person can manage before performance and outcomes start to slide.

In theory, efficiency should help you handle more work. But in practice, many small projects are harder to manage than a few large ones. Competing priorities, simultaneous deadlines, everything urgent all at once.

The real killer isn’t time – it’s context switching.
Holding too many things in your head at once.

That’s what destroys productivity.

For me, the sweet spot is around three to four projects. That’s where I hit maximum income, peak performance, and genuine flow.

But I’ve pushed past that. I’m now managing nine concurrent projects, mostly small ones. The same systems that once freed me up are now the reason I can physically get through the workload but mentally, I’m running on fumes.

My strengths have turned into liabilities:

• My Achiever is in overdrive.

• My Command is trying to make people efficient, not effective.

• Worst of all, my Focus superpower doesn’t know what it should be focusing on, so it’s fallen into the basement.

Being stretched this thin, I’ve become frustrated and, honestly, not great to be around.

I’ve intentionally let two projects I’d already committed to go, not because I couldn’t finish them, but because I couldn’t deliver at the standard my clients deserve. From the outside, it looks like I’ve let people down. But the truth is, I’d gone beyond my cognitive capacity.

As I get back on top of my remaining projects, I’m realising they may not even take up 40 hours a week. But I can’t fill that “gap” by taking on more work, because that would push me straight back over the edge.

And that’s the paradox:

You can’t scale yourself by becoming more efficient once your cognitive bandwidth is maxed out.

The Cognitive Bandwidth Ceiling

Research supports what many of us intuitively feel.

The American Psychological Association estimates that task switching can cost up to 40% of productive time. Each shift between projects forces your brain to reload context of who’s involved, what’s pending, and where things are at before you can meaningfully re-engage.

Atlassian data shows the average recovery time after a context switch is 9.5 minutes, with almost half of workers reporting that switching between projects makes them less productive.

In project management circles, most experienced practitioners agree that three to five concurrent projects is the sustainable limit. Beyond that, quality and focus deteriorate – not because of hours worked, but because of mental fragmentation.

The irony is that these losses creep in quietly. You’re still replying to emails, attending meetings, closing tasks, but your depth of thinking, judgment, and creativity flatten out. The more projects you take on, the thinner your cognitive bandwidth stretches, until even simple decisions feel heavier than they should.

The Efficiency Trap for Consultants

Here’s where things get challenging for anyone selling their time.

When you become more efficient, your total billable hours often go down. At first, that’s great. You get through work faster, with less stress, and you can justify a rate increase or take on more clients.

But there’s a ceiling.
A hard limit.

Once you hit the limits of your cognitive bandwidth, you can’t just keep adding clients or projects. Performance begins to slide. Stress rises. Eventually, you spend more time firefighting than performing.

It’s a cruel paradox:

The better you get at your work, the fewer hours you can sustainably bill.

Sure, you can lift your rates 10–15%, but you can’t stretch your mind any further. Efficiency compresses time, but it can’t expand cognition.

This is the invisible trap for high-performing consultants.
Systems and automation give you control over the mechanics of work, but they can’t expand the mental space required to do it well.

Once you hit that point, your income can actually decline, even as your performance peaks.

From 2x to 10x Thinking

So what’s the lesson here? It can’t be “do less work” or “be less efficient.” I refuse to accept that.

This is why 10x Is Easier Than 2x by Dan Sullivan and Dr Benjamin Hardy resonated so strongly with me.

A 2x move is optimisation – squeezing a bit more out of the same model.
A 10x move is transformation – changing the model entirely.

Becoming more efficient is a 2x move. It helps, but it won’t get you past the cognitive ceiling. It isn’t scalable.

A 10x move requires a new way of operating. It forces different questions:

• What if I stopped optimising the work and started transforming the system?

• What if I stopped selling my hours and started selling what those hours have taught me?

For me, that shift is The Modern Project Leader, sharing my knowledge on strengths, and packaging the systems I’ve built into automation bundles and courses.

Under this model, I’m not selling hours anymore. I’m selling outcomes, systems, and insight, things that can scale beyond my own time.

The Real Measure of Productivity

The lesson isn’t about doing less or working slower. It’s about recognising when optimisation has reached its limit and when transformation becomes the only sustainable path forward.

True productivity isn’t about filling your week or maximising billable hours. It’s about clarity, control, and contribution – the ability to perform at your best without sacrificing your wellbeing or integrity.

Once you understand your cognitive limits, you stop chasing more and start building better.

For me, that means fewer projects, deeper work, and a business model that rewards transformation over optimisation.

Because you can’t scale yourself forever, but you can design systems, products, and knowledge that work beyond you.