Simple Scanning - The Rules
Saturday, December 2, 2017 at 8:25 As I said in an earlier blog post, I was using Simple Scanning as far back as twenty years ago. But at the time I did not realise its potential. I may say more about that in future posts.
Up to now I’ve never written any formal rules for Simple Scanning preferring to describe it as “going round and round the list, doing tasks which stand out”.
There are several concepts there which need explanation, particularly if you haven’t used any of my systems before.
Simple Scanning is what I call a “long list” system. In long list systems the aim is to write everything down that you have to do, want to do or think you might do in one long list in no particular order. There should be no attempt to categorise, prioritise, or emphasise particular tasks in any way. There are no rules about what size individual tasks have to be or how they should be worded.
Since this is an intuitive system it is recommended (but not essential) that you use paper and pen rather than electronic means. A lined notebook is ideal.
If you use electronic means, be wary of time management apps which try to make you categorise and/or prioritise. These will work against the effective use of the system.
The second concept which needs explanation is what I call “standing out”. This basically consists of scanning through the list, doing tasks which you feel you want to do now. Don’t ask yourself “Do I want to do this task now?”. Just let the tasks stand out of their own accord.
For some people this comes easily and naturally, for others it takes longer to grasp.
Don’t get too worried about it. There’s no right number of tasks to select per pass. Assume you are doing it right unless you either find yourself selecting every single task or alternatively none at all. Allow it to find its own level naturally.
Another concept is that you should work on a task only for as long as you feel you want to. It is better to work “little and often” on tasks, than to work in huge bursts of activity - specially if the thought of a huge burst of activity puts you off from ever starting.
So however long your list is, you should be doing only tasks which you feel you want to do now and only for as long as you want to do them.
Now for the actual rules for simple scanning:
- Write a list of things you have to do, would like to do or think you might do. One task per line.
- If you are not sure about a task write it with a query (?) after it.
- There is no need to make the list comprehensive because you can keep adding to it as you go along.
- Don’t make any additional markings to indicate category or priority.
- There are no rules about how you write the task - just as long as you can understand what you meant when you come back to it.
- Tasks can be as large or as small as you like.
- When you have finished writing your initial list, read it through quickly once to remind yourself of what is on it and where.
- Scan down the list until a task stands out as being ready to do.
- Work on it for as long as you like.
- When you have finished working on it for the time being, re-enter it at the end of the list if there is still work to be done on it or if it’s a recurring task.
- Cross out the task you have been working on.
- Continue scanning down the list and repeat Rules 8. to 12. until it is time to stop working.
- When you reach the end of the list, circle round to the beginning of the list.
- At the beginning of the next work period, start again from where you got to.
A couple of suggestions:
- Draw a line across the page at the beginning of each day. This helps to remind you whether you’ve done a daily task that day, and enables you to see how long any task has been on the list.
- When re-entering a task, do it in the following order: 1) Re-write the task at the end of the list 2) Cross out the old one. This will prevent you from failing to remember to re-enter a task, and also from losing your place.
Reader Comments (79)
This seems it would work really well especially with the line under the last task of the day before. Like it!
thanks for the advice. I am VERY taken with the single list and have been for many years. Just didn't have the mental framework to make sense of it and feel confident it would work.
Brett
Perhaps I missed the link. If I did, ignore this post. Thanks.
<< is there a link to these simple scanning rules posted on your TM systems link? >>
Not at the moment. But even if there were, it would be quicker just to search for "Simple Scanning" in the "Search This Site" box in the right-hand margin.
I used Simple Scanning since you've posted this blog post. So I now have been using it for a few weeks. I appreciate your generosity and kindness in sharing your thoughts and techniques with us.
The positive:
* My days feels smoother. Things seem easier, and I am more in flow.
* The system is easy and simple to use, I don't get lost in working on the system more than doing the work.
The not so positive (which might be a reflection on my own incomplete perspective rather than reality, so I'd appreciate your input):
* People like Steven Pressfield in his War of Art argue that Resistance is our signal that we are working towards our greatness. And we should take it, feel the pain, the bitterness of working through resistance because that is what a professional does and that is how a professional achieves his greatness. That what is standing in the way of our Greatness is Resistance, so not pushing through it will keep us mediocre. What brought you to think differently than this common view?
* I seem to take less rests, which can end up in me switching from tasks in every few minutes. What I mean is I have rest activities in my list, yes. However, before I used to schedule much longer rests. Nowadays, because of my ability to get new "jolts of dopamine" by switching between tasks, when I start getting tired, I switch more and more between tasks which extends my tiredness until exhaustion. So yes, I do more, but rather than resting before I need to and therefore staying sharper longer, I go deeper into my reserves because I can just switch to a more interesting tasks. But how would this be different than switching to facebook or email every few minutes to get a "jolt of dopamine"? Nicholas Carr in his book The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains argues that not focusing on one thing for a long time and switching tasks frequently to get a dopamine hit makes us shallow and unable to keep focused for a long time. We're becoming ADD because of switching so much.
* I feel internally a bit "guilty". Most of what I have learned about productivity made the case for a "cost of switching activities". That each time you move from activity to activity, you lose focus and need at least 20 minutes to regain it. It doesn't seem to be the case, because in my testing, if I try to stay on an activity after I am resisting it, I just can't focus enough to give it the clean
* Before, I used to be able to buckle down and work for 50 minutes on one single activity. Now I am much more aware of resistance and switch . Peter Drucker argued in the Effective Executive that to become effective, you have to focus on one thing for extended periods of time. Now, it is working well, but it makes me worry that over the long term I am not training myself to get into some "deep focus" state that can get me into true flow where the best work can happen. Although now it seems like I am "riding the wave" of my attention, taking it where it wants to go and therefore finding really good concentration this way, I am worried this might train me to becoming unfocused and distracted over time.
* Why should I trust my intuition? Just asking you from your own experience, why did you come to this conclusion? Because, in my own mind, what separates us from animals and caused us to create the civilization and progress we enjoy today is thinking, not just following our whims and our intuition. What led you to think intuition leads to better or equal results compared to thinking?
Thanks again, Mark. And I hope you'd think about these and answer from your own experience, what brought you to our own POV and perspective in trusting that this system is superior and that trusting our intuition is the right thing to do and that not pushing through resistance is the way to get more of what we want out of life and do what has to be done to get there.
I don't claim yet to be master of all this, but I can say after many years of doing Mark's systems I have not lost the ability to focus for longer periods.
Back to speculating. In fact, I think that switching around between tasks and running through the list regularly has the opposite effect: I get distracted less because I am confident the other things are being/will be taken care of in time. It is still important to spend longer periods on stuff, but if you approach it right you can switch away from an intense task for a short while and come back to it without the huge effort to get back into focus. In part it depends where you leave things off. If you leave where the problem you need to tackle next is clear (even if the solution isn't clear), then it is easy to get into.
One approach to this is via the phenomenon of "hypofrontality" - reduced activity of the pre-frontal cortex, allowing other parts of the brain to get a look-in. eg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RaRQ9jPk4E
This may be linked to flow-states
In all cases, I tried to not do Simple Scanning and "force" chunks of productivity, but it feels very exhausting, I am using too much willpower, and then I become distracted. So I am neither fully focused on the project I assigned the chunk of productivity too, nor doing something else.
I don't know, man. This is not easy. Just because Simple Scanning is more pleasant to use doesn't make it more "right". But it seems to have a lot of right things about it.
So I was wondering about Mark's experience and answers to the questions I asked about.
So maybe how this relates is: whatever task you feel ready to do, it means your skill, energy, attention, readiness is perfect for it, so it is much more likely to get you into flow / hypofrontality.
That would make sense.
Few pointers:
- Intuition is part of thinking, it is not over or beyond the process of thinking. What we believe to be intuitive may be something beyond of conscious cognitive realm. Malcolm Gladwell's 'Blink' is entirely about this premise. Our body (before it reaches our brain or the conscious part of it) senses and in many ways 'predict' what is going to happen. And it is good to recognize this and appreciate it.
- The book, 'Thinking Fast and Slow' by Daniel Kahneman - specifically deals with this dichotomy. However, based on my minimal experience in language learning and acquisition, I would suggest categorizing intelligence into 3 parts - instinctive, intuitive and logical. In case of productivity, standing out for me would mean, my personal psychological readiness (borrowing it from Mark). I remember Mark beautifically stating that you cannot logically get your psychology ready, despite saying yourself you should be doing a task, how important it is, how long-term benefits you might reap out of it. There is sense in this process, but there is a limit to it. So better use the unknown element of 'intuition' to your aid to do it.
- In Vipassana meditation, there is this idea of using body senses to identify one's thought imprints. It argues that it is not that it doesn't exist, but we, at our current mental state of 'vibratons' simply can't detect it. We have to sharpen it or arrive at it to sense it.
- We should differentiative between memory, consciousness and wakefulness. We often mix these. Here is a beautiful talk on the same - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7irEcQHChw
Despite these explanations, I am just a novice in understanding how this works. I have been using simple scanning process - however as with always, I am 'forced' to the tasks that needs to be done, given the external obligation/ committments.
I would also like to understand this notion of 'deep work/ focus' and 'cost of task switching' that people like Cal Newport are making popular (which I am skeptical, given the completely non-average environment that Prof.Newport works in).
Would love to hear of course from the master himself - Mark :)
Side note:
And of course, all said this done, I think Mark's ideas are something that is not being recognized, for want of better word(s) 'academically' or 'scholarly' - like others do. I am simply not talking about SS, but also his process of thinking/ writing. May be his ability to put these ideas in a straightforward way, unduly dismisses the depth it comes up with. I hope people like Blue can give it necessary connections and depth.
I am thinking of trying Simple Scanning as described above as my attempt to move to more of a HITM system in 2019.
A question: my current approach is to start the day by reflecting on key objectives for the day and write a short dynamic list of key items. Could (or should) this process be incorporated into the Simple Scanning approach? (Could perhaps have a recurring task: reflect on goals for the day.)
I do find the daily review of aims helpful, but I also want to get away from older tasks/commitments falling by the wayside without proper consideration (hence my interest in a HITM long list approach).
I don't want to impede the aim of allowing intuition full freedom to decide on priorities and timing, so I'm inclining to just run with the system as described and see how it goes, but any comments would be welcome.
Reflecting on main goals at start of the day seems to influence what stands out during scanning, such that I get started on the "real work" early on.
Right, back now to the 3 page list I seem to have generated in the 30mins since I took up simple scanning.
<< I might have missed it, but how do you know where you got to when you start the next work period. Do you leave one dotted? >>
Another method is to start each day at the beginning of the previous day. This is easy if you've followed the suggestion to draw a line at the beginning of each day. The reason for starting there is that you get to work on all the active stuff straight away without having to wade through old stuff first.
<< Do you think capturing new tasks starting at page bottom and executing tasks from the top down would give a slight edge? >>
Not sure what you mean. This is exactly what happens in Simple Scanning.
Or do you mean this?
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2009/6/27/autofocus-2-time-management-system-af2.html
The latter is what I mean. I didn't realize that Simple Scanning with the "scanning" in the other direction (new->old instead of old->new) was AF2!
Now I've got to go back and read about both!
If it hasn't already been discussed ad nauseum, why do you prefer the scanning to be the same direction as the direction of capture? Both appear to handle clumping, attenuation, and maturity. The main difference I see is the attitude towards how much weight should be given to urgent or recent tasks relative to more mature tasks on the list. Am I missing something, what has your experience been?
I'm still not totally clear what you mean. However:
Simple Scanning scans in the direction old>new. As far as I can gather you are proposing scanning from new>old on the grounds that "it gives more weight to urgent or recent tasks relative to more mature tasks on the list."
In fact it has the opposite effect. When you scan from old>new any work which is worked on but net completed is re-entered at the end of the list, plus any new tasks/projects. The result is that when you arrive near the end of the list you have a list of all tasks you are currently working on, plus all new tasks. You can carry on working on and re-entering these tasks until they are either complete or you have done as much work as you currently wish to do on them.
Contrast this with working new>old. You get the new tasks, but can only work on them once and then have to go right through the entire list before you get a second shot at them.
Apologies if I wasn't clear, you are correct that I am proposing scanning from new>old. In thinking through your reply I realized I've been doing Simple Scanning wrong for a long time, starting back at the beginning after each task is done. As such I can see why focus on urgent/new tasks is actually
I guess without realizing it I was proposing that after every to-do is actioned and possibly re-entered, that you start again at the very end of the list and work towards the start. This isn't Simple Scanning with reverse scanning, it's AF2!
Picking up at your last task is a key simple fact I've been missing, which changes the list functionally into an endless loop with no beginning or end to denote urgency or age as AF2 had. I can see how this is preferable because of clumping, and except for tasks needing to be done immediately, same-day tasks will be handled well enough with SS.
Back on this forum since a long time ;-)
I like the concept of " simple scanning" by a certain way it is very near the excellent autofocus 1 except that it was a close list (one Scan per page) and this is a running list separated per day.
The stand out system is incredible... It is great for doing the right things.
Anyway cleaning the list is indeed crucial, otherwise the increasement of the list becomes un manageable.
I am going to try it and see how it works for me !
Thanks for sharing
Essentially the principle is to read it through whenever you feel you need to. That of course will vary from person to person."
This finally makes sense. No wonder I was feeling bored to use SS.
Let me explain.
I kick-started my journey using Dreams method. No list, only weekly or sometimes daily future vision.
Started using SS, when the above became too directive & was loosing the fun of actual Future visioning, 1 year or 3 years or 25 years down the line.
Trusting my intuition using SS, came very naturally. Because I always get to do only that felt like doing, following my natural instinct.
But lately I felt dragged because once I do a task, I knew what I need to do but to be true to SS, went back to the list to 'find' what stands out. Sometimes it matched, sometimes it doesn't.
Then for the past week I started 'cheating'. I scanned haphazardly so I will arrive at the task I wanted to do :)
Felt bad sometimes that I didn't refer my SS list to decide what task that stands out and to be done. I simply went on doing the task, carried away by the flow..
(I almost wrote an entire book, this way;)
Now this finally makes sense. SS list is my guide to intuition, not a dictator...
The key point is whether in this moment I'm following my intuition or not..
#TrustYourIntuition
<< A couple of suggestions:
[1.] Draw a line across the page at the beginning of each day. This helps to remind you whether you’ve done a daily task that day, and enables you to see how long any task has been on the list. >>
I suppose this suggestion would also entail writing today's date below the line?
I'm curious if this suggestion is still recommended today. Is it strongly recommended?
I used Simple Scanning longer than any other long list system, but I admit that I never followed this suggestion. I suppose I was reluctant to add clutter to this perfectly "simple" system. Probably also reluctant to affect the intuitive selection process in any way. On the other hand, I could see this line drawing exercise as adding a closed-list type effect to the system, a bit like DIT or DWM. Anyway, I'm just curious about it. I don't remember this detail being discussed previously.
<< I suppose this suggestion would also entail writing today's date below the line? >>
Not necessarily. It is entirely up to you. The main purpose of drawing the line is to record where you stopped the previous day. That will work whether you date the line or not.
<< I'm curious if this suggestion is still recommended today. Is it strongly recommended? >>
It is not intended to be anything more than a suggestion, and I don't think I ever "strongly recommended" it.