Testing SuperFocus v. 3

As has been mentioned several times in the review of the systems, there is a revision of SuperFocus being tested at the moment by me which promises to solve all the problems which the other systems have.

I have been testing it now for eight days. I set myself several benchmarks, all of which so far have progressed extemely well. You can read about the testing here.

The new rules only effect the way in which the second column in SuperFocus is used. The basic structure of SuperFocus remains unchanged. However, although the change is relatively minor, the effect is enormous. I really believe that the perfect balance between easy tasks and difficult tasks, and urgent tasks and non-urgent tasks can be achieved through this system.

I’m now going to set myself a few more goals to be carried out through the use of the system. These will include more frequent blogging, getting my newsletter moving again, arranging some seminars and re-orientating my website to the new system.

I see these as part of the testing of the system. So you can see for yourself what the system is capable of achieving.

Review of the Systems: Conclusion

The review of AF4 (Revised) concludes the review of the systems which I have produced since Do It Tomorrow.

The complete reviews can be accessed by clicking here.

All these systems represent attempts to answer the basic conundrum of time management:

How does one get the correct balance between the easy and the difficult, and the urgent and the non-urgent?

Or to put it another way:

How does one slog one’s way through the difficult stuff without neglecting the many essential small things?

Or another way:

How does one get all the myriads of small things done without neglecting the big things?

Human nature being what it is the tendency for most people is to go for the easy and urgent things at the expense of the more difficult and non-urgent. But just because something is easy and urgent doesn’t mean that it isn’t necessary to do it. So systems which try to throw the balance too far in opposing direction of the difficult and non-urgent often end up collapsing because neglected minor tasks can quickly build up into a backlog which is both urgent and difficult to clear.

None of the systems I have reviewed here get the balance quite right, though many of them introduce interesting new concepts and advances on existing time management theory.

I believe though that the forthcoming revised instructions for SuperFocus do achieve this balance. I have been engaged in testing them over the last week and so far they have proved to work perfectly. The testing will have a few weeks to go yet, and then if all has gone well I will release the instructions. You can follow progress on the Discussion Forum.

Review of the Systems: AF4 (Revised)

The rules for AF4 Revised can be found by clicking here.

Brief summary

Using AF4 as a basis, the system divides tasks into Old, New, Recurring and Unfinished. “Old” and “New” equate to the Closed and Open Lists respectively of AF4, while “Recurring” and “Unfinished” tasks are written on separate pages. The different types of task can be dealt with in turn or alternatively in any order.

Advantages

The division of tasks into the four groups happens automatically as all new tasks start on the Old/New page.The system removes the main diadvantage of AF4, the length of the Open List, as the number of tasks going into it is greatly reduced. The division of tasks into four pages allows one to concentrate on one type of task at a time (e.g. unfinished tasks) and it also makes it easier to spot where problems are arising (e.g. excessive numbers of recurring or unfinished tasks).

Disadvantages

The system is not good at dealing with urgent tasks, as these may be located anywhere in the four groups. Although identifying unfinished tasks is useful, there is not enough pressure to finish them.

Conclusions

This is a powerful system but still has problems getting the right balance between tasks.

Review of the Systems: SuperFocus

The rules for SuperFocus can be found by clicking here.

Brief Summary

SuperFocus is basically AF1 with a second column added for unfinished and urgent tasks.

Advantages

As in AF4-3T the emphasis is on finishing tasks. However it is more flexible and doesn’t slow down to the same extent when a number of longer tasks are being processed at the same time. It also allows urgent tasks to be done quickly.

Disadvantages

It can become rather directionless with a lack of proper balance between the two columns on the page. These disadvantage will be overcome by the forthcoming v. 3.

Conclusion

At the moment SuperFocus suffers from some disadvantages, but when the new v. 3 is released in the near future it will be the perfect time management system.

Review of the Systems: AF4-3T

The rules for AF4-3T can be found by clicking here.

Brief Summary

As its name suggests, this system is a combination of AF4 and the 3T Method, in which AF4 is used to feed 3T with tasks.

Advantages

It is more thorough than AF4 because of the emphasis on finishing tasks which 3T brings. Because unfinished tasks do not get re-entered in the Open List, the Open List is more manageable than in AF4

Disadvantages

It has the same disadvantage as 3T in that progress can be slow if more than one large task is included in the three tasks.

Conclusion

This is a very powerful method and represents a considerable step forward in the efficacy of these systems.

Review of the Systems: Three Task Method (3T)

Instructions for 3T can be found by clicking here.

Brief description

It consists of picking three tasks and working on them in rotation until two of the tasks are completed. Then another two tasks are picked and once again one works on the three tasks until two are completed.

Advantages

It is designed to ensure that tasks are worked to completion, and can be used on its own or using another system to feed it.

Disadvantages

Progress can be very slow, especially if more than one of the three tasks will take some time to finish.

Conclusion

3-T is not really a complete system, but can be very effective in clearing projects which have got stuck. It drew attention to the desirability of working tasks to completion, and later systems have found better ways of doing this.

Review of the Systems: DWM (Day, Week, Month) 2

You can find a description of DWM2 by clicking here.

Brief description

DWM2 does away with the page-a-day diary used in DWM, and instead uses a single list in which new tasks are marked with a small black circle or other suitable sign. Otherwise the system is the same as DWM.

Advantages

An ordinary notebook can be used instead of a page-a-day diary, there is no wasted space on pages and all tasks are entered or re-entered at the end of the list instead of having two entry points.

Otherwise the advantages and disadvantages are the same as for DWM.

Conclusion

This is a rather faster and more convenient version of DWM.

Review of the Systems: DWM (Day, Week, Month)

The full instructions for the system can be found by clicking here.

Brief Summary

Unlike the Autofocus methods the DWM system makes the dismissal process the key. The system uses a page-a-day diary. New tasks are entered one calendar month from the current date (e.g. if today is 26 January, new tasks are entered on 26 February). All re-entered tasks are entered one week from the current day. All pages older than the current day are deleted together with any remaining tasks on them.

Advantages

The automatic dismissal after one month for new tasks and seven days for re-entered tasks concentrates the mind. It also encourages the little and often approach.

Disadvantages

The use of a page-a-day diary is rather clumsy. It is difficult to keep the two entry points clearly marked. The automatic timed dismissal is rather a blunt instrument, and doesn’t provide a good fit for many tasks.

Conclusion

The problems with using a page-a-day diary are solved in DWM2 - see the next review.

Review of the Systems: Predictive To Do List

A description of this method can be found by clicking here.

Brief Summary

As a change from the Autofocus-type systems, the Predictive To Do List consists of writing down a list of all the tasks which you actually think you will do today. Instead of ticking items off the list as you do them, the idea is to do one’s work without looking at the list more than a couple of times during the day.

Advantages

This is a much easier way of working than ticking tasks off a list, and usually the complete list can be finished during the day.

Disadvantages

There is a strong tendency to write down a long list of things which you want to do (or feel you ought to do). This turns this into yet another to do list and the ease of working is lost.

Conclusion

It can be very effective, provided that the list continues to be of the things you actually think you will do today. If that is lost sight of, then the method will fail.

Review of the Systems: Autofocus 4

The rules for AF4 can be found by clicking here.

Brief Summary

This is a straightforward system for processing an undifferentiated list. The list is divided into two parts, the Closed List and the Open List. Each time all the tasks in the Closed List are finished or dismissed, the existing Open List has a line drawn at its end and becomes the Closed List. Tasks added after that are the new Open List. To process the list, first you circulate around the Closed List until no more tasks are ready to be done, then you are allowed one pass through the Open List before returning to the Closed List.

Advantages

Because of the nature of the two lists, the system allows urgent tasks to be dealt with while still encouraging the more difficult tasks to be done.

Disadvantages

When the Closed List is down to a few items, the vast majority of tasks are in the Open List. This means that there is often a considerable time lag before any pressure is applied to complete a task that is in the Open List. One result of this is that the little and often principle doesn’t work well with the more difficult tasks.

Conclusion

AF4 is probably the most generally effective of the four Autofocus systems. In spite of its drawbacks many people have reported that it has continued to be effective after a long period of use.

Review of the Systems: Autofocus 3

The rules for AF3 can be found by clicking here.

Brief Summary

AF3 was an attempt to combine the best features of AF1 and AF2. To do this, it started each day with “Reverse Mode” (AF2) and “Forward Mode” (AF1) with the dismissal process of AF2.

Advantages

My own experience with using the system for a reasonable period of time was that it didn’t really offer much advantage over using either AF1 or AF2 on its own.

Disadvantages

The switching process was a bit clumsy and using AF2 dismissal  reduced some of the effectiveness of AF1.

Conclusion

This system was not an improvement over either AF1 or AF2, and has been quietly forgotten.

Review of the Systems: Autofocus 2

The rules for AF2 can be found by clicking here.

Brief Summary

AF2 was an attempt to solve the problems AF1 had with urgent tasks and tasks that needed to be done in a particular order. It used the same undifferentiated list of tasks as AF1, but dealt with them in a different way.

Instead of treating each page of the list as a unit, the complete list was treated as one unit, thereby making the number of lines on a page or the number of tasks remaining on a page irrelevant. Selection of the next task was done by going to the end of the list (i.e. the last task entered) and moving back from there until a task “stood out”. There was also a dismissal process in which the first block of unactioned tasks was put on notice of dismissal each day.

Advantages

All tasks on the list were potentially able to be done at any time (unlike AF1 where you were restricted to tasks on the current page). It was a good system for keeping track of a myriad of urgent tasks.

Disadvantages

Although better than AF1 at dealing with urgent tasks it was even more liable than AF1 to favour easy tasks over more difficult ones. With a long list, it could also take a considerable time to decide on the next task as often many pages had to be gone through before a tasks could be selected.

Conclusions

AF2 was one of the less successful methods, and I don’t think many people use it now. However if I was put into a situation where I had to juggle a lot of urgent tasks, I would certainly consider it as a method of keeping them under control.

Review of the Systems: Autofocus 1

The rules for this system can be found by clicking here.

Brief Summary

The idea behind Autofocus (as it was originally called) was to provide a system which was much more effective and intuitive than Do It Tomorrow. The aim was to be able to enter all the tasks which arose or occurred to one without any form of pre-selection into a single list and to let the system do the sorting - or more precisely for the system to provide a framework which would enable one’s intuition to do the sorting. The list was written in a notebook, with each page of the notebook forming a closed list. Each page would be worked on in turn until no further tasks felt ready to be done. The important concept of dismissal was introduced which happened when one was no longer willing to do any of the tasks on a page.

Advantages

The system was extremely simple, and was very conducive to working little and often. It reduced resistance considerably and could produce an almost addictive feeling.

Disadvantages

There was a strong tendency for easy tasks to be done at the expense of more difficult ones. It was also poor at handling urgent tasks and tasks which needed to be done in a particular order.

Conclusion

I and many others love the ease of use of AF1. Most of the following systems have been attempts to keep this while improving the focus on important and/or urgent tasks.

Review of the Systems: Do It Tomorrow

The full description of this system can be found in my book Do It Tomorrow.

Brief Summary

The book’s basic premise is that we get behind on our work because we don’t pay attention to the basic formula “One day’s outgoing work much on average equal one day’s incoming work”. The idea is that one day’s worth of incoming work is collected for action the following day in a dated “Task Diary”. A line is drawn at the bottom of the day’s list so that each day there is a finite amount of work to do. Tasks which arise during the day and have to be done that day may be added to the list “below the line” but the default is to add tasks to the next day’s list. If one falls more than a few day’s behind, then it is important to audit the outstanding work in order to cut it back so that one can keep up. There is also the concept of the “Current Initiative”, by which one project is focused on first thing every day. This is particularly suitable for backlogs, work on improving systems, and getting major projects up and running.

Advantages

By providing a finite amount of work to be done each day, the system enables you to know when your work for the day is finished. It makes it easy to diagnose what the matter is if you fall behind. It also introduces several important concepts which are made further use of in the subsequent Autofocus systems, such as little and often, recurring tasks, and so on.

Disadvantages

The two main disadvantages are that people are often reluctant to carry out a proper diagnosis when they fall behind. This considerably reduces the effectiveness of the system if it is constantly running behind. There is also a considerable effort needed to push through to completing a day’s work, which can lead to resistance building against the system.

Conclusion

This is still a favourite system of many people. It works well for those who are prepared to work at it in a disciplined manner. However many find it too exacting.

Review of the Systems

Over the last couple of years I have developed quite a number of systems with the help of the commentors on this blog. Let’s see if I can remember them all.

Even though it dates from a few years earlier, I’ll put DIT at the head of the list since it is the benchmark for what follows:

Do It Tomorrow (DIT)

Autofocus 1 (AF1)

Autofocus 2 (AF2)

Autofocus 3 (AF3)

Autofocus 4 (AF4)

Predictive To Do List

Day-Week-Month (DWM)

DWM2

Three Tasks (3T)

AF4 - 3T

Superfocus

AF4 Revised (AF4R)

Have I forgotten any? I’ve only included the ones I’ve tested and written up myself otherwise the list would be considerably longer!

What I want to do over the next few weeks is to review these systems by writing a short summary of each in turn together with my perception of its strengths and weaknesses. I will invite anyone who wishes to share their experiences of the system to do so in the comments.

Update on Saturday, December 18, 2010 at 18:34 by Mark Forster

Oops, I forgot one: the Predictive To Do List, which rather sank without trace but actually works surprisingly well. I’ve added it to the list.

Life Hacker Article on Autofocus

There’s a big article on Autofocus and its latest variants on Life Hacker today.

The rules by which I ran the demo

From my point of view the demo on Friday was a great success. I not only achieved my definite aims for the day, but I also did all those things which I said I would like to do if I had the time. The only thing I didn’t succeed in doing was to watch a movie - but that was because the DVD I was expecting didn’t arrive - so instead I watched an episode of “Downton Abbey”.

What most impressed me about the day was that I finished it feeling that I had achieved some really substantial progress, rather than just processing a load of trivial stuff.

This has continued to be the case yesterday and today. Because the emphasis is on FINISHING, I’m beginning to really hate seeing unfinished work.

Although I said in the demo that the 3-Tasks method was being fed by an AF4 list, I didn’t spell out exactly how that was done. So here are the full rules I was working by:

1. To begin, draw up a list of tasks. Draw a line at the end of the list.

2. As new tasks come up, add them below the line.

3. The part of the list above the line is known as the “closed list”. The part below the line is known as the “open list”.

4. Select three tasks from the closed list. Mark them by putting a dot beside each task in the left-hand margin).

5. Work on each of the three tasks in turn for as long as you feel like.

6. Continue circulating round the three tasks. When you finish each task, cross it out.

7. When you have finished two of the three tasks, you select another two from the closed list and work on all three tasks in turn as before (See Note 1).

8. When you have selected as many tasks from the closed list as you want to do for the time being you may then start to replenish the 3-Tasks from the open list. You may do one pass through the open list in one direction only before returning to the closed list, and continue as before (See Note 2).

9. Whenever you return to the closed list, you must select at least one task from it. If you do not select at least one task, then all the remaining tasks in the closed list are dismissed (see Note 3) by being marked with a highlighter rather than being crossed out.

10. When all tasks on the closed list have been either selected or dismissed, draw another line at the end of the open list. The open list now becomes the closed list, and a new open list is begun.

Notes:

1) After you have selected the two new tasks you start work on the task which was already on the list, not one of the new tasks.

2) It can be difficult sometimes to remember where one has got to in moving through the closed and open lists to select tasks. To make this easier, the rule is that one starts selecting new tasks from the position of the task you have just crossed out.

3) Dismissed tasks should not be allowed back onto the list without being reviewed carefully as to the reasons for their not having been done. It is a good idea to have a task “Review Dismissed Tasks” on the list.

Live Demo - 3 Task Method

I’ll be kicking off the live demo somewhere around 8.30 a.m. GMT on this post.

I will only be showing those tasks which are actually being worked on in the 3-Task system. The system is being fed by an AF4 list which will not be shown.

The two things I particularly want to achieve tomorrow are to go for a long walk and to write a plan for our church fund raising campaign. I would also like to remain on top of all routine matters (email, paper, housekeeping, etc) and to watch a movie on DVD at some stage. If I can, I would also like to plan the workshop I am giving in Leuven in two weeks time, and make progress on my income tax return.

All tasks contain three stages: Preparation, the Task itself, and Clearing Up. A task is not complete until all three of those stages have been carried out.

I’ll be starting the day with only two items on my list as one was completed yesterday.

Key: Bold type shows when a task is first introduced onto the 3-Task list. When a task is shown in strikeout it has been completed. Therefore if a task is in both bold and strikeout then it was completed in one go. If a task has been worked on but not struck out, it remains on the 3-Task list. My comments are in [square brackets]

0800 Re-number bins

0802 Computer housekeeping

0809 Re-number bins

0818 Email [bit of a delay here as Outlook has decided not to start properly]

0831 Comments

0838 Email

0841 Breakfast

0901 Check investments [after yesterday’s big rise in the stock market]

0910  Email [Outlook fixed at last]

0921  Breakfast [remember clearing up after a task is part of the task]

0933  Comments [note this is a recurring task - high level of comments expected today]

0943  Cash Flow Forecast

0948   Breakfast

0958   Check Diary

[I think some people are having difficulty in following what is happening, so to make it easier to follow I am changing the way the list is presented. Tasks will only be struck through when they are completed. I hope that will make it easier to see what tasks are on the list at any one time. I’ll also put tasks in bold when they come onto the 3-Task list for the first time]

1008  Download Camera

1023  Email

1031  Comments

1056  TweetDeck 

1102  Paper

[I have now got to the end of the open list in AF4. So there should be weightier matters ahead!]

[A couple of general observations so far: 1) There is quite a considerable overhead involved in putting this all on the blog - so things are moving slower than normal; 2) The dynamic of AF4 is changed by using it with the 3-Task system because all re-entries onto the open list are “empty”, i.e. there is no outstanding work on them.]

1112  Walk

1119  Weed Handbooks File

1129  Walk [This is the bit of the task where I actually do the walking (and it will probably include a pub lunch too). So it’ll be several hours before I post again.]

1619 Leuven Presentation (first draft)

1631 Newsletter (first draft)

1658 Walk

1728 Leuven Presentation (first draft)

1738 Newsletter (first draft)

1812  Fundraising Plan (first draft)

1843 Income Tax Return (next section)

[Here I go back on the open list]

1853 Back Up Computer

1857 “Downton Abbey” [for the non-Brits among you, this is a TV series that has been enthralling the nation]

        Income Tax Return (next section)

I ended after watching Downton Abbey. So how did I do? Looking back on what I said I would like to do during the day, I see I did all of it. The only thing I could have working on further was my income tax return, and I will carry on with that tomorrow.

I mentioned in one of my comments in square brackets that the 3-Task method changes the dynamics of AF4.  If you look at my list of tasks above you will see that the unfinished tasks which I had more than one go at were:

Re-number bins
Email
Breakfast
Walk
Leuven Presentation
Newsletter
Income Tax Return

In ordinary AF4 all these would all have been moved to the open list and the concentration which I brought to them would have been dissipated. So all in all I am extremely pleased with my efforts today and convinced of the benefits of using the 3-Task method with AF4.

Live Demo Tomorrow (November 5)

Recently a lot of the discussion on the Forum has been about FINISHING. By that I mean putting the emphasis on working on a project or task until it is completed. One method which I have developed for getting to completion is the 3-Task Method. This consists of picking three tasks and working on them in rotation until two of the tasks are completed. Then another two tasks are picked and once again one works on the three tasks until two are completed.

I intend to run a real-time demonstration tomorrow of how this works in practice. I will open a blog post with a list of tasks I am working on. Every time I start a new task I will add it to the list throughout the day.

If it won't fit on a post-it, it won't fit in your day

There’s an interesting article by Mark McGuinness on his time management method based on my book “Do It Tomorrow”