Wednesday
Oct042017
Thoughts on the Long List - Preliminary - What system to use?
Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 7:00 Much of the work I have been doing on the subject of the long list has been testing out various long-list systems to see which would be the best for my purposes.
What I required was a system which fulfils the following criteria:
- Fast
- Flexible
- Comprehensive
- No resistance
- Any length of list
- No pressure to do any particular tasks
- Relies entirely on intuition, i.e. “standing out”
Not a lot to ask.
I came to two conclusions:
- Only one system ticks all the above boxes and that is Simple Scanning (scanning round and round the list doing whatever stands out without any formal method of clearing undone tasks). This is a very annoying conclusion for me because I first started using Simple Scanning in 1997 and have spent the past twenty years trying to invent a better system. The reason I did this is because at the time I didn’t understand what it was the best system for.
- More important than which system you use is that once you’ve chosen one you stick to it. None of my theories about the long list will work if one keeps changing systems. Again this is a very annoying conclusion for me because I could have spent the last twenty years becoming a multi-billionaire and secret ruler of the world. Not too late now perhaps… mwahahaha!
Finally, a bit more background reading:
Reader Comments (47)
The key word there is "formal". What I am trying to avoid is anything in the system itself which puts pressure on particular tasks, because that interferes with the intuitive process.
Once a task feels dead, you can and should delete it.
re dismissal -- It seems logical that if we trust our intuition on what to do, we can also trust it on what NOT to do, and what tasks 'stand out' for dismissal.
For me, what interferes with intuition is the monkey-mind/ego trying to 'figure things out' and optimize a system (simple scanning) that appears not to be improved by optimization.
Trusting our subconscious to take care of the big picture for us (we're the cursor on the screen while the subconscious sees the entire screen) is a big ask, esp. in the kinds of work environments the readers of this blog work in. I suppose the end result is we will all derive our own interpretation, or not, of this 'non-method' and if it works, we won't be able to say how or why.
On a different note, this perspective is all kind of slotting into how I'm viewing some spiritual issues in my life, the "let go and let God" perspective. I wish I were more articulate about expressing this, but that's what's chiming with me right now.
Thank you, Mark. This has been interesting to read and to ponder.
As much as I like my new system, it gets hung up on the dismissal process sometimes. Sometimes it just doesn't feel right to dismiss a page, even though the rules say it's time to dismiss.
http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2689687
So I was thinking of modifying that rule. But now I think I will just drop it altogether and let the page be dismissed or deleting whenever it feels ready.
Thanks Mark!!
Also, would this Simple Scanning include the normal autofocus erase-and-reenter motif? because the way everybody else works, they don't usually do that, but it seems to me either way would fit your criteria.
<< Is Simple Scanning indeed the only system that qualifies? How about Simple Scanning BUT: If you want to back up and scan a page again, you may. >>
Actually that's permissible under Simple Scanning. Since the rules don't require you to do any tasks on a scan, you can just move directly to anywhere you like if you want to. However if you were to make a regular practice of it you would be in danger of reducing the first three criteria: fast, flexible, comprehensive.
<< Also, would this Simple Scanning include the normal autofocus erase-and-reenter motif? >>
Delete and re-enter, yes, if you mean leaving the task on the page with a line through it. If you mean erasing all trace of it, that's not my normal autofocus motif.
<< because the way everybody else works, they don't usually do that >>
What do they do, then?
<< but it seems to me either way would fit your criteria. >>
Since I'm not clear what you are proposing as the other half of "either way", I can't answer that. But the notebook I use with deleted and non-deleted tasks gives plenty of information for my intuition to work on.
This is going to be explained in detail, right?
<< This is going to be explained in detail, right? >>
It already has been explained. See the article linked at the end of the post.
What I'd be intrigued to read (maybe in a follow-up article) would be what supporting tools you are using for the catch-all list.
For example, are you recommending to keep a listn of Projects/obligations?
How do you handle deferall and re-entering of Tasks (tickler file, evernote,..)
<< Great to see you posting again, Mark! >>
Thanks!
<< What I'd be intrigued to read (maybe in a follow-up article) would be what supporting tools you are using for the catch-all list. >>
In general, as few as possible for each person's individual circumstances - but not less than that.
<< For example, are you recommending to keep a list of Projects/obligations? >>
Only if you need one (which you do if you have a tendency to take on more work than you can handle)
<< How do you handle deferral and re-entering of Tasks (tickler file, evernote,..) >>
Personally I just put them in my calendar/schedule, which I keep on Evernote.
Followup to another question: I may be blind, but I don't see clearly in the other link what Simple Scanning is "best for". Maybe best for "whittling down" what you're ready to do? Very fuzzy on this.
I'm guessing that twenty years ago you didn't have the tools you needed to make simple scanning work well. These tools are incredibly important:
* Little-and-often
* Guilt-free dismissal
* "Standing out"
To my mind, your twenty years has been well spent.
Your thinking has influenced mine enormously. Thank you!
I don't know whether that is actually the most common practice among to-do list users. I would be surprised if it were because it's not a very efficient way of doing things. Do you have a source for that statement?
It would fail my selection specifically on the flexible, comprehensive and intuition criteria.
As for what Simple Scanning is best for, you got it in one!
No, the real difference is what I explained in the Natural Selection article.
"Little and often" features in my first book published 17 years ago and written 18 years ago.
"Guilt free dismissal" was a feature of Autofocus which is about 9 years old now (though most people failed to get the point, including myself to some extent)
"Standing out" was a feature of the original Simple Scanning which is, as I said, 20 years old.
I liked the rapidly generated list of 10 or 12 to scan,
that allowed things to stay or be drawn into the forefront of one's mind.
But also I loved the 'Resistance List'. I found this gave me clarity, stopped
me freezing & challenged me to get moving! I still have to use this now -
& probably always will. I've yet to see this simple but effective idea mentioned
in any other TM book I've come across. I think YOU once said, TM books are often written by people who seem NOT to have had a problem with it!
(Flow writing around a theme/ issue was also a powerful tool discussed in the book.
And it was an entertaining read to boot.)
Mark responded: "I would be surprised if it were because it's not a very efficient way of doing things. Do you have a source for that statement?... It would fail my selection specifically on the flexible, comprehensive and intuition criteria."
I am my own source. This is how I observed my mom handling lists, which were only used when needed. This is how people at school operated: list of homework assignments, do one, scratch it off. For bigger projects, do some and switch to another thing, then take a break.
<< This is how I observed my mom handling lists, which were only used when needed. This is how people at school operated: list of homework assignments, do one, scratch it off. For bigger projects, do some and switch to another thing, then take a break. >>
Yes, this is exactly how my wife and her mother before her handle lists. However my list of criteria was for handling a long "catch all" list, which those lists don't do.
<< My observations agree with Alan's. Observing the list-making activities of my relatives and coworkers, I usually see short ad-hoc lists where items are not crossed out till they are done.>>
I don't dispute that for a second but it's got nothing to do with Alan's claim, which was that this method met my criteria for handling a long "catch all" list.
It doesn't.
- Every day has a heading being the date.
- First thing in the morning I review the last 5 days of entries and the open entries exactly one month ago.
- I re-enter items I want to focus on today.
- Simple scanning start by looking only at the current day until nothing else stands out.
- Then the simple scanning list gets extended to include yesterday's open entries as well.
- Then if yesterday/today list has nothing else standing out then include entries two days ago.
- Repeat.
The above has a first soft dismissal after 5 days as it would fall out the daily review and a hard dismissal after a month.
Nice and tidy.
This not really simple scanning, and since it includes a soft and hard dismissal does not fulfil the requirements for the purposes I've described in these articles. That doesn't mean it isn't good method though.
I'm not clear what happens to the entries more than two days old, but less than a month old.
Do you keep adding a day to your scan until you have covered all the days in the month? If not, how do tasks on these days get actioned at all once they are no longer eligible for the five-day review?
I've found that simply putting the various dismissal or setup rules on my list as tasks themselves satisfies my urges to switch systems, even if I never "dot" them.
I had two rules (when I fill up a notebook, transfer only one item from each page AND if I get to the end of the list without dotting anything, dot the first item), and while I think they are actually really good, I've abandoned them for simple scanning round and round until I select something. What's cool is, I can just write down those rules as tasks and do them if they stand out. This also leaves room/creativity for creating new rules that I think might help. I may never use them and that's ok too!
I had to switch to a banana clip and loose paper so I could add/remove pages easily and also so I could keep the current "dotted" item on top so I could find where I left off (hard to do with a spiral bound.) It's important to me to be able to keep the list in my pocket for spur-of-the-moment collection, as I'm a part-time game designer and ideas come anytime.
TLDR? I'm using simple scanning too!
The only items subject to be chosen are the open items on the day a month ago and the last 5 days open items. Items on day 6-29 will not be subject to consideration. They were subject to soft dismissal.
Thus when you do your morning review you must know that an item on day minus 5 will not be reviewed for another 25 days. Items on the day minus a month ago will be gone forever.
You thus will need to make a conscious about those items to take action today or let it go.
Realistically you may work only on the list limited to today and may not get to extending the list to yesterday. That is fine.
*Morning review: Review open entries of the last 5 days plus the open entries exactly one month ago.
I've been looking at starting one of these systems for a while... and I'm not sure if I should jump to the most recent or if an older version might work better for me. Are they all in succession that the last "perfected" one is the "best" ? or are they all just similar and one version might work better for different people? ... I have had "look at Mark Forster methods and other productivity systems" for a month on my own to-do list! .. Hmm find a to-do list system is on my to-do list.
I am the Queen of Procrastination who can stretch a 30 min task to 2 hours because of getting side tracked, (and attempting to be more efficient ) for example I would choose "open email" from my list, but while I'm in there on the computer, I will reply to 3, I should pay that bill and oh yes, check the prices of an item I need to buy..etc. Then one of the ppl I sent an email to replies which requires another reply. etc etc you get the picture. . .. and wow then all of a sudden it's 1pm.. all I've done is "check email" and I have to write "check email" again on the list. . I am attempting to be more efficient but it is backfiring on me. And to make it worse, while I am doing one task I think of 4+ more to add to my list. It keeps getting longer. Gah. Drowning.
So my question is.... Are there different versions of your program that would suit different personality types or should I just concentrate on the Perfected version and run with that. ?
Thanks.
While playing with Simple Scanning, I found myself almost automatically dotting things in FVP fashion. And it occurred to me, it meets all these criteria, too.
Interesting observation about how most people use lists. I was going to say firmly that most people do not make short lists, leave each thing on the list until it's complete, then scratch it out, and eventually throw away the list.
Then I thought about how I handle projects and super-short plans. That's exactly how I handle it. I also like scratching things off, so will often subdivide a task so I have something to scratch off after each work session. When I struggle to focus, I sometimes make a list for just the hour, and reward myself with tearing up the entire list when it's done (or drawing a big X over it if it's in my notebook).
For longer plans and my catch-all list, though, I work the other way. I rarely finish the list. When I've worked on something long enough, I cross it out and re-enter. (Technically, it's already re-entered on my grid, but it's still crossed out and on next-day's list.)
I think of myself the latter-way. Long list, cross off and re-enter when done for the day, many lines never get done at all.
My mother and most administrators I've worked with make a list each day, often on a small page-a-day calendar. When the day's done, they DDD what's left. Sometimes the page becomes a diary of what they did. If they use that page for incoming notes, it's on a distinctly different part. Their written list is usually non-routine, smallish things. Routines and large things, that I would normally put on my long list, stay in their memory, or maybe calendar if they need to block out time, say for a trip to the offsite library or a large project that can't be started early.
<< Are they all in succession that the last "perfected" one is the "best" ? or are they all just similar and one version might work better for different people? ... >>
As I said in the blog post, more important than which system you chose is that you stick to the one you've chosen and don't keep chopping and changing from one system to another.
I shall be writing a further post about systems in the near future.
<< find a to-do list system is on my to-do list. >>
That's probably the most important task you have on your list.
<< I would choose "open email" from my list, but while I'm in there on the computer, I will reply to 3, I should pay that bill and oh yes, check the prices of an item I need to buy..etc. Then one of the ppl I sent an email to replies which requires another reply. etc etc you get the picture. . .. and wow then all of a sudden it's 1pm.. all I've done is "check email" and I have to write "check email" again on the list. >>
Join the club!
Seriously, a way that works for me is to put the distraction on the list.
So instead of replying to John's email, put "Reply John's Email" on your list.
Instead of checking prices, put "Check price of purple bananas" on your list, and so on.
<< While playing with Simple Scanning, I found myself almost automatically dotting things in FVP fashion. And it occurred to me, it meets all these criteria, too. >>
No, FVP doesn't meet the criteria because with a very long long list it becomes very slow to scan (at least it does if you do it properly) and the dotting removes some of the flexibility. In addition the compulsory dotting of the first task is against the "no pressure" criterion.
Fast FVP as the name suggests is fast, but the other two criteria are still wanting. In addition I personally find that having to make more than one choice (do/don't do and scan/don't scan) has an inhibitory effect on my intuition. As a result I've never been able to stick with it for very long.
As I said to Tracy above, I'll be writing more about systems and the long list shortly.
It should be your intuition that keeps you focused on particular projects, not the system. The system is there to give a level playing field for your intuition to work.
If one or both of the two big things are urgent then one would expect that to be picked up by your intuition.
For non-urgent big things they will begin to stand out to your intuition once the surrounding little things have been dealt with. They will become physically isolated on the page. Once you have started to move on something there is a tendency to keep moving.
And let me emphasize, this is a principle, not a proposition.
I'm glad I'm not alone! Everyone I know seems to have it all together, when they are handling much more than I am... and me...I feel like I have this tornado of tasks going around me constantly.
<<I shall be writing a further post about systems in the near future.>>
Thanks Mark, I will watch for it. I'd like a comparison of all your systems before I dive into one system that might be the wrong one for me.
Discipline I think is one of my biggest problems. If I have a system that I commit to, I am hoping to be strong enough to stick to it. No more "floating".
<<Tracy, add Pomodoro Technique to the list of things to consider.>>
Thanks Cricket. I've seen this referenced while I've been searching for a system, and struck it off because I don't think I have the self-discipline. But possibly if I try to work it into another system, one of Mark's, using them together it might help. I will look into it again and give it another try!
(Do they sell a tomato timer that will reach out and slap you upside the head if you don't finish up and move on to the next task? Now, THAT'S the one I need LOL)
Would Jung's concept of two kinds of thinking: directed thinking, and dreaming or fantasy-thinking help with "standing out"? ie putting your mind in the right state to better facilitate standing out. I saw it nicely summarised as relaxation alters perception.
"struck it off because I don't think I have the self-discipline"
If that's your thinking you need to read the original Pomodoro story. The method was invented to CREATE self-discipline. You don't start with 25/5, you start with whatever you believe you can pull off, maybe 5 minutes before a break. Afte you get good at that, you increase the timer as a stretch goal. You also don't do 25/5 for 8 solid hours. You do a few then take a longer break. Again, if you don't have the discipline start with a couple. Over time you challenge yourself to do more pomodoros, thus developing in yourself the self-discipline. (Well, now you don't need to read the original story, I just told you what it was about.)
"Do they sell a tomato timer that will reach out and slap you upside the head"
A timer app like I use with my iPhone could do the slapping for you. I like "30/30", which lets me set up a 25minute time, and then I get an alarm signaling a 5 minute break, then another alarm signalling time to start up again. I can also do followup alarms should i ignore the first one, or a 3-minute warning in advance to prepare me to stop. (Of course this is the same spirit as snoozes on your normal alarm clock. Ultimately I suppose they are a bad idea because they might establish a habit of ignoring the original alarm.)
- http://www.tate.org.uk/art/research-publications/henry-moore/henry-moore-the-sculptor-speaks-r1176118
So far it feels very liberating and flexible! I had been using an 'all in one' tasks and notes system since April 2017 but I felt that the workings of it were getting gummed up and inefficient.
I think I will use some sort of weekly review to record how many items have been worked on and how many open pages are in the system even if to simply give myself some sort of feedback and structure to stick with the list in the longer term hopefully.
Would Flexible Autofocus meet your criteria? I find it useful to circulate around a page where there are related tasks for a particular project which are not listed in the order I want to do them.
Yes, I think so. Regardless of whether it does, if it does what you want it to do, use it.
I am wondering what your precise method is for doing the scanning. I can think of a few ways of doing it (assuming a paper notebook):
(1) Scan forward from the last selected item, paying no attention to pages.
(2) Cycle around on a page till nothing stands out, then move forward to the next page.
(3) No particular method -- move forward or backward or jump to the end or whatever, depending on where you think you need to focus.
Maybe there are others?
Mark, what do you typically do?
By "scanning round and round the list" I mean (1) in your list.