In this paper, we focus on the presence and effectiveness of busy directors. We propose that the presence and effectiveness of busy directors is associated with the life cycle stage of the firm. While firms in the introduction, growth and decline stages of firm life cycle are more likely to demand the services of busy directors as compared to the mature stage firms given the critical needs of such firms, busy directors may prefer to be on the boards of mature firms on account of the attached reputation benefits. We find evidence in support of the ‘supply side’ argument. We find that busy directors are less likely to be present in the introduction and growth stage firms as compared to the mature stage firms. We also find that the presence of busy directors is positively associated with firm performance in the growth and decline stage firms. Overall, we believe that a regulatory limit on the number of directorships held by a director is not a good idea. The directors are talented and knowledgeable enough to choose a firm and the amount of time and effort to exert.