Friday
Oct122018
Top 10 Reasons Simple Scanning is the Best of All Possible Systems
Friday, October 12, 2018 at 10:17 Here are ten reasons why Simple Scanning is not just the best system so far discovered, but also the best of all possible systems.
- No need to categorize, prioritize or standardize
- Weekly reviews not needed
- Resistance is non-existent
- Everything is enjoyable
- You can see clearly what you have done and what you haven’t
- Intuition rules
- No need to weed the list
- Maximizes the time available
- Nothing gets missed out
- You can put everything on the list
Reader Comments (42)
Do you use separate project work sheets/dynamic lists for some tasks or do you add the smaller tasks directly into your Simple Scanning list?
The great thing about Simple Scanning is that it is flexible enough to do either. But my own personal preference is to put as much as possible into the Simple Scanning list.
Another thing I discover is that the only other method that I kept was the dialogs from "How to make your dreams come true". Not the vision and reality; maybe the whats better list on occassions, but the dialogs... It's strange, but they provide some sense of distance, calm and perspective.
<< Do you have any new insights on how SS beats FFVP? >>
1. Because FFVP uses pre-selection, I find I experience more resistance than with SS.
2. SS ensures the whole list is scanned equally, which doesn't happen with FFVP.
3. I find I have more sense of control over the list as a whole with SS than I do with FFVP
4. FFVP is heavily weighted towards the end of the list rather than the beginning. SS is evenly weighted over the entire list.
5. There's a greater tendency to spend too much time chasing the end of the list with FFVP.
I realise some of these are quite subjective and reflect my own personal preferences, and I certainly don't want to discourage anyone from using FFVP if it suits their personal style better than SS.
“Routines are the basis of all good work.” <— something Scott Adams (creator of Dilbert) recommends in his talks/books ie Systems over goals
<< Although if so would you be able to say the advantages of SS over a such tweaked AF1? >>
Since you haven't said what the more relaxed dismissal system would be, I can't answer specifically. However as a general comment my experience is that the shorter a list is the greater the proportion of tasks will be that get actioned.
So for instance the 10 Task system in which you count off blocks of ten tasks and treat them as a virtual page usually results in a high proportion of the tasks being actioned. With AF1 the page in my notebook is 31 tasks. Fewer tasks proportionately will get actioned than with the 10 Task method, but the proportion will be greater than with Simple Scanning in which the "page" is the whole list.
The difference therefore is between progressing through the list slowly or fast. I think fast is better because 1) it means urgent tasks can be actioned quickly and 2) the whole list is kept in mind better - stuff doesn't get lost.
How many tasks are on your SS list these days? Approximately how much time would it take you to scan the whole list?
I would like to experiment and copy your speed and see what happens.
<< How many tasks are on your SS list these days? >>
As of this minute, 86.
<< Approximately how much time would it take you to scan the whole list? >>
On a full working day, I would probably get round the whole list three or four times. On a day-off like today (Sunday) it would be more than that because I would be skipping over the weekday work tasks. (I use one list for everything).
<< operating on my iphone, deleted tasks disappear and there is no record of what I have done. >>
This is a matter of which app you are using and how you have set it up. If you want to be able to see what you have done, then I'm sure it's possible - even on an iPhone. If you prefer deleted tasks to disappear, then leave it as it is.
<< there is a definite need to weed things. >>
I didn't put it very clearly, but what I meant was is that there is no need for a formal weeding rule. You can of course delete anything that's no longer relevant at any time.
Regarding apps, in fact my issue is copying. I can certainly mark something Done in its place, but if it's not done and merely set aside, it's more tedious to reenter at the end as I would have to copy the text and make a new entry at the end. I'm sure a different tool wouldn't have this issue but I like the current one very much.
I've started using Simple Scanning and - almost immediately - began to appreciate the thinking behind the rules. Question:
A lot of my day has fits and starts. Small children that need to be supervised... a private practice whereby I'll have 10/15 minutes before/after a client's session.
Would you coach someone to use their list during these small breaks of 5, 10, 15 minutes? Do you suggest using the list for only larger chunks of time? Curious to hear your thoughts.
<< Would you coach someone to use their list during these small breaks of 5, 10, 15 minutes? >>
Definitely, yes. During the course of a day these small breaks add up to a significant amount of time. That fits neatly into the little but often scenario.
Have you had to employ any tricks/tips to not wander from your list? I find it challenging to not drift from one thing to next... only realizing it's been many minutes (hours?) since I've strayed from the rules and list. One thing I've considered is timing myself, and then gauging the effectiveness of my day. In other words, I'd use a timer to measure my Simple Scanning activity, and then stop the scanner when I'm not. I'd then add up the sessions and compare/contrast throughout the week. Any thoughts on this?
<< Have you had to employ any tricks/tips to not wander from your list? >>
Put plenty of enjoyable things on the list as well as work.
When you want to have a break from the list decide how long it's going to be and set a countdown timer..
Also, of my 100+ items on my list, there are 2 or so that are extremely important for me to spend 90% of my day on at work. When reviewing the list for only 3-4 times each day, how is it that I can get to the these items little and often (often as in I probably need to get them 15-20 times through the day with "tiny and often" other items in between). The past few days I have found myself wasting quite a bit more time at work because my long list is a distraction at times. "Oooo...that is so small, I can just do that now. Oh, and that too. Oh, and I why not that?" Then I've spent a lot of work time doing personal items that I feel guilty for. What is the solution to this? I did find some success lately with GTD's admonition to "just trust your intuition". That is similar to SS, but the SS algorithm of scanning the entire list means that you spend time reading through the entire list and often getting distracted by other less important things that really shouldn't be worked on. I know the answer may be: just don't mark them as something to do. But then I always end up scanning a list of 100 plus items knowing I'll just be wanting to really scan the top 4 work things that are really weighing on my soul. Perhaps in this case it makes sense to have a personal list and a work list?
In my heart I believe these systems to be much user friendly than GTD. I have noticed however that I am slightly more distracted while using them the past couple of days because of the "full list scanning" that is part of the algorithm.
Questions: Do you have that many things because you have been ignoring them? Does finally getting to these "won't take very long" things mean your list might get shorter and soon things will be better sized? If you should spend 90% of your time on the Big One, how long can you stick with it when you get there? Suppose you put in your mind the question, what should I work on next and start scanning. Would such a headset help you skip past the chaff and get through the list to the Big One more quickly? Quickly enough?
If pondering these questions don't resolve your issue, I'll await Mark's insight to see if there's help before suggesting system changes.
If you decide in advance that you’d like to spend 30 minutes on a task, isn’t that “as long as you’d like”?
<< do you often (or even always) time yourself on tasks? I have 15 and 30 minute hourglass timers at my desk that I have used on and off. >>
Not with Simple Scanning, no. But I've often used timing with other systems and indeed have written a whole book about it - "Get Everything Done".
However the whole point of Simple Scanning is to maximize the use of your intuition, both as to what to do and how long to do it for.
<< This seems somewhat at odds with the instruction to work on a task "for as long as you'd like". I do enjoy the flexibility of that statement, but also find that I often get distracted as well. >>
Distraction is a sign that you're not doing the right thing, or not doing the right thing any longer. Move on.
<< Also, of my 100+ items on my list, there are 2 or so that are extremely important for me to spend 90% of my day on at work. When reviewing the list for only 3-4 times each day, how is it that I can get to the these items little and often (often as in I probably need to get them 15-20 times through the day with "tiny and often" other items in between). >>
That question makes me wonder whether you're doing the system right. There should be no problem doing a large task multiple times during one pass of the list. You keep re-entering it and then picking it up again.
<< the SS algorithm of scanning the entire list means that you spend time reading through the entire list >>
No, it doesn't. The Simple Scanning algorithm is fast precisely because you only need to read the bit of the list between the task you have just finished and the next task you select. Are you sure you're doing it right? Have another read of the rules.
<< I know the answer may be: just don't mark them as something to do. But then I always end up scanning a list of 100 plus items knowing I'll just be wanting to really scan the top 4 work things that are really weighing on my soul. Perhaps in this case it makes sense to have a personal list and a work list? >>
It may make sense to have a personal list and a work list. I don't know - it depends on your circumstances. But that's not really what you are describing.
If you want to spend concentrated time on four major projects, just make sure you select them every time you come to them. You will then spend your time rotating between them for the rest of the day. The 100 plus tasks on the rest of the list won't get in the way at all. And you'll still be able to include anything urgent that comes up. In other words Simple Scanning is ideally suited to the scenario you've just described.
<< If you decide in advance that you’d like to spend 30 minutes on a task, isn’t that “as long as you’d like”? >>
Not within the meaning of the act, no. In Simple Scanning you should work on something for as long as you [continue to] feel like it.
<<Distraction is a sign that you're not doing the right thing, or not doing the right thing any longer. Move on.>>
The distraction comes in wanting to do one of the "personal item"--which constitutes the majority of my list--at work. Sure I can do it, but that's not what I'm being paid to do. (Writing this response while at work...case in point).
<<That question makes me wonder whether you're doing the system right. There should be no problem doing a large task multiple times during one pass of the list. You keep re-entering it and then picking it up again.>>
True, except in one situation for me, which occurs often: I'll often work on the last item of the list because it is something that I just wrote down seconds before and want to now do right now.
Example list:
(A lot of items at the start)
Big project
Research family activity
Clean desk
Empty email inbox
I decide I've worked on the big project long enough:
-----Big-project----- (crossed-out)
Research family activity
Clean desk
Empty email inbox
Big project
Now I want to take a break and go for a walk and get hot chocolate:
-----Big-project----- (crossed-out)
Research family activity
Clean desk
Empty email inbox
Big project
Take break
I decide to take the break, which is at the end. I now circle back around to the start when I return from my break, and scan the entire list again. I really just need to get back to Big project, but in scanning the big list again, I start doing smaller personal things while at work. Maybe, I need to write down "take break" first, then cross out Big Project and rewrite so that it comes after the thing that I just decided I want to do right now?
I have other questions, but it is time to go home. In the spirit of little and often, I'll ask more later. Thanks so much for your help. These aren't criticisms. I see that this has huge potential for me and just want to learn the mechanics of it and understand my challenges while working the algorithm.
Some of my other questions:
1. Do you take non-actionable notes in your notepad also? If so, how does this fit in? If not, I guess you take meeting notes in a separate notepad (ug...two notebooks). Yesterday I took notes into my long list and then put an action to process notes and move them to a central note repository. When that occurs, I planned to cross out the notes. Is that how you do it?
2. When you work on the last item on the list, do you cross it out and write it again at the end of the list, directly under itself?
That's your intuition talking to go to your "Big Project" right away, and you should follow it.
Think of it this way: skipping all those items to get to your Big Project at the end of your list can still be considered "scanning the list." As Mark said, "The Simple Scanning algorithm is fast precisely because you only need to read the bit of the list between the task you have just finished and the next task you select.
Also, note what Mark also said above: "Put plenty of enjoyable things on the list as well as work."
Very roughly, if the page is mostly notes, then I put a circle beside any action item. A square beside any action item for during the meeting (often "clarify" or "schedule sub-group"). If the page is mostly a list, it's easier put a box around reference notes than to put a circle on each line. If the page is mostly one project and the note is about something else, it goes in the margin or gets a big star. Other people divide pages top/bottom or left/right, for notes vs action. Experiment. Different methods might work best in different settings. I take notes differently as meeting chair (lots of squares), meeting secretary (squares and more direct quotes), committee head (circles and squares) or general member (mind wandering).
Small Tasks
If they're personal tasks that have to be done during working hours, clock out. That's the ethical thing to do. It also keeps you focused so you spend less time on them.
I often use small tasks as transition, or warm-up, or for breaks. Again, only work tasks while on the work clock. I specifically say, "I will do A and B" or "I will do them for 5 minutes, then get coffee, and back to main project." That way they don't expand. If too many build up, I'll take 30 minutes and do a bunch of them.
If the small tasks are distracting you, then, yes, get them out of sight. Move them to a mosquito list, and write Mosquitoes on the main. Or move your big projects, if that's faster. SuperFocus had two columns on each page, one for the main list, and one for projects you wanted to hit often. It had quite a long run here.
If you keep putting off a large task, check to see if it's S.T.R.E.S.S. (acronym for common reasons why we put things off)
http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2674568
Also, see my comments on Dopamine.
http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2721471
Or try Just Get Out the Folder -- a favourite here.
Luckliy there is Colley's rule:
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2007/2/5/the-resistance-principle-and-colleys-rule.html
Ironically this led Mark to create FV, not simple scanning, if I remember rightly.
The interesting thing for me in the Post quoted by michael is the link to the Endowment Effect. That once you have chosen something it becomes yours and you start to love it.
<< Without those two rules, is Autofocus any different than a simple open list? >>
With an open list you would normally scan from one end of the list to the other, doing any tasks which stood out on the way.
With Autofocus you go to one page at a time and circulate round the page until there are no more tasks you want to do on it for the time being Then you move on to the next page.
It does seem to make quite a difference - for me anyway.
-------------
This was written before Simple Scanning was a thing!
Interesting thing is Mark argues for AF.
------------
I'm posting this because I tried FVP for a day, found it incredibly slow for me, and my priorities/ mood changes immediately after I get on the last 'dotted' task. So, went back to SS. It's been 2 weeks since with it.
And I'm purposefully waiting for the 'task' to arrive at the level of being 'actioned'.
This post itself is a result of my 'clearing notes' task. But I found this comment above that I saved, so wanted to share.
So now back to clearing notes... :)
I can't find the text you quoted on this page. Could you give some indication of where it is?
I just copied and pasted this quote in my notes.
Sorry :)
I was searching for SuperFocus
Maybe it is from some forum discussion.
But I really couldn't place where I found it.
I was browsing thru a lot of content some times back.
And suddenly stopped, because SS is going on smoothly!
Searching the entire sentence helped :)
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2016/3/25/catch-all-revisited.html#comment21542690
So I'm re-reading through some of my comments from three(!) years ago and realizing that I had a lot to learn in how to use SS. I've been using it off and on since then and find it to be one of the best systems I've tried. Applying the principle of "if it needs to be done now, do it now" is what I was often missing.
I often find myself cycling back and forth between GTD and SS. I find I have an itch for organization in my lists, which pulls me to GTD. After spending some time with GTD, I realize that my lists are nice and organized into "contexts" (i.e. smaller separate lists) and next actions but I just don't review them as often. If I can keep reminding myself that organizing tasks doesn't provide much return on the investment, then I think I can stick with SS for much longer, maybe even for years. Any tricks you've found Mark to let go of the organizing itch? Do you find some motivation in counting up the number of actioned tasks each day? I wonder if I could present my subconscious mind with objective evidence that I get more done with SS, I'd be more likely to ignore the itch.
You can subscribe to the comments so they are sent to you by email as they occur.
I like Simple Scanning and Autofocus, and also Seraphim's Serial No-List; they all have a similar feel. I've never been drawn to trying the Dave Allen GTD (I think that's what you're referring to) because I'm already far too prone to getting lost in planning rather than doing - I feel I'm pretty good at planning, but hopeless at following that up with action, and I fear getting involved in GTD would pull me down an endless rabbit-hole. However, I feel SS, AF and SNL lists get too 'busy' with a jumble of unsorted tasks, and I end up trying to find a half-way house whereby I re-sort the tasks into areas to try to sort the wheat from the chaff. Sometimes this takes the form of putting general areas on my long list and having a side-list of tasks within that area (e.g. instead of individual items covering all the things that pop into mind that I want to look up online, I put Web Search on the long list, then keep a separate sidelist.)
Thanks for the e-mail suggestion, Mark, but rather than getting e-mails (of which I already have quite enough), I'll now make the Latest Comments section part of my visit to your website.