The Minor Tasks List

An aid to no-list systems is a form of dynamic list called the “Minor Tasks List”. I mentioned these briefly at the end of my article on dynamic lists, but it was only an easily-missed short paragraph. So I want to emphasize the benefits of using them.

Using these Minor Tasks Lists can speed up the processing of small tasks without affecting the working of the rest of the system. They also help in remembering the sort of easily-forgotten stuff which tends to get written on sticky notes round your computer screen.

How exactly do we define a “minor task”?

My definition is a task which is small enough to be actioned in one go and is not part of a series of connected tasks. So for instance reading a newspaper article you’ve clipped would be fine, but reading a chapter from a book (assuming you’re going to read the rest of the book) wouldn’t.

Obviously there are grey areas here, but if you use the Minor Task List you should ensure that it doesn’t develop into a way of subverting the rules of whatever system you are using.

Like any dynamic list the Minor Tasks List is written off the top of your head, is added to as you think of new things, can be done in any order and expires at the end of the day.

Although primarily designed for use with “no-list” systems, it can be used with virtually any system. It is very effective at allowing the master system to focus on what is important, while still allowing trivial but essential tasks to get done in an efficient manner.

What is a "no list" system?

My most recent article on “No-list” systems seem to have generated a storm of comments, which is all to the good. However one or two people have indicated that they are not too sure what a “no-list” list is. How can you have a list which is “no list”? A very good question!

A “catch-all” list is the opposite of a “no-list” list. Maybe better terms for them would be “very long list” and “very short list”. Very long in this context usually means 50+ items and very short means 5 or less items.

Another way of describing them would be “a long list which you add to whenever you think of something to do” and “a very short list which you make up as you go along.”

A “catch-all” list looks like this:

Tidy bedroom
Change bedding
List PR actions
Read “C——-” magazine
Read “K———” magazine
Obtain specimen legacy leaflet
Draft own legacy leaflet
Thank fundraising team
Blog result of fundraising
Thank newsletter subscribers
Cancel newsletter contract
Thank supporters
Blog latest social event news
Call David K
Read —— Newletter
Update giving page
Read “The 100 Years War”
List possible blog posts
Yabla
Read “B———” magazine
Clean sink
Empty WPB
Cut hedge back
Set up L’s new laptop
Read V’s letters
Print more blank schedule sheets
Shred
Dust
Listen to French news
Sort office
Process social event photos
Walk footpaths for Ramblers Association
Money?
Weed desktop
Weed flagged emails
Contact fast walking organization
To think about…
Prune rose bush
Get prescription signed
Sort L’s mail
List action need on C Blog
New house number
Kingsley Vale walk
Destroy old notebook
Re-read L’s instructions
Expenditure audit
Tax return
Weed pamphlet rack
Withdraw money from ——
Book holiday
Check heating settings
Action needed on Legacy campaign?
Write recommendation for N’s book
Push ups
The plank
Check bank balance
Weed this list
Read Pocket articles
Facebook
Email
Synchronise diaries
Put books away
Paper
Thanks to N for party
Check diary
Rake leaves
Voicemail
Do dishes
Adjust carriage clock
Charge batteries
Check heating settings
Ideas for new projects?
etc etc

A “no list” looks like this (or shorter):

Blog
List ideas for new book
Email
Publicity Project
Walk 3 miles

Which do you think is likely to produce the most focused action?

A typical example of a “no list” system is the one given in my book Secrets of Productive People. You write five tasks and do them in order. Any task you don’t finish you re-enter at the end. When you have only two tasks left on the list you fill up with another three.

See also:

Effect on the Brain

Why No-List Systems Work

Effect on the Brain

In a comment I wrote:

“I’ve experimented with one day dismissal a lot. In fact the system I’m using at the moment, which is proving incredibly effective, is a one day dismissal system.

“My tip would be to forget the bit about being catch-all as well. I feed each day’s sheet through the shredder as soon as the day is over. The effect on one’s brain is quite remarkable.”

Seraphim asked:

“Could you elaborate on this a bit more? I am intrigued.”

What is the effect of feeding each day’s sheet through a shredder?

First of all, it brings about a sense of completion. The next day starts with a clean sheet with nothing left over from the day before. Whatever work you were engaged in has to be re-created.

Your mind is not however re-creating the work from scratch. During each day paths in the brain are either strengthened, amended or abandoned. This means that one’s work is always alive, relevant and creative.

This is a contrast to working off an old list, where creativity consists only in writing down yet more tasks on the list without actually taking action on them.

Let’s compare the thinking and action that goes with “catch all” and “no list” methods, which are the two extremes of continuing and one-day lists.

Catch all

The simplest type of catch-all system is where you just have an open list of tasks and circulate through it, doing the tasks that feel ready to do. At the beginning of each day what you are presented with is usually a long list which has been built up over a period of time, a matter of days, weeks or in some cases even months. At some stage you thought of a task and wrote it on the list. It may get done quickly, but a large number of these tasks will hang around on the list for days.

What your mind therefore has to do is to choose between anything up to 100 or more tasks - all of which you thought were a good idea at some stage in the past. You can only do one of these tasks at a time and very likely while you are doing that task even more are being added.

Your main motivation is to get rid of the tasks on the list. This of course can never actually be done so you always end the day with much the same number of tasks as you began it - frequently more.  Because you have such a large number of tasks to choose from your focus is poor and it’s difficult to build up good routines.

No-list

The simplest form of no-list system is just to write down the next thing you are going to do before you do it. The act of writing down the next action forces you to make a conscious decision about what to do, rather than just drift into something.

Your mind has no list to rely on, so what sort of tasks is it going to choose? It will probably come up with one of the following;

• The next task in an established routine
• Something that is on your mind because you are currently working on it
• A project you have previously decided will be your main focus for the day
• An urgent project or task
• Something which is causing you concern because it is overdue or in danger of becoming so
• Something you make a conscious decision to do because you want to do it

Note that all these things relate to what matters at the moment. Your concern is with what you are actually involved in. At the end of the day you will have filled the day with stuff that is actually relevant and is within your capabilities to do in the time available.

Your brain therefore will be concentrated on the immediate reality of what is in your life, rather than diffused over a vast sea of possibilies, most of which will never happen.

See also:

An Effective No List System? - Yes!

Why No-List Systems Work

Setting up systems (Reader's Query)

Kenny writes:

If you’re up for another article my next question would be the idea of systems and how you go about setting them up and their power. At the moment I’m working on creating systems in my life to make me more effective and efficient in my life.

There’s a good example of how to set up a new system in my earlier post What stops me from finding things quickly?

If you’re having problems with an existing system, then the first step is to examine it to see where it’s going wrong. So for instance to stop yourself from losing things the first step would be to look at what you are doing at the moment when you put things down.

My speciality is losing my glasses. When I look at what’s happening, what am I doing? I put them down anywhere without really thinking about it, And they frequently get covered by clothing, papers or files so that they can’t be seen.

This is a very simple example and more complicated systems will of course take longer. Nevertheless the basic procedure remains the same.

Ideally you should have systems ready before you need them, rather than try to put them right after they are causing problems.

As far as daily routines are concerned a “no list” system will naturally lead you into effective routines because your mind will naturally follow paths that have proved successful. For instance my routine for writing blog posts evolved effortlessly just by making small amendments to the same repealed sequence of actions each day.

An Effective "No List" System? Yes!

You may recall that in my article about what is required in an effective “no list” system I said that I was in the process of developing a new time management system based on the “no list” method. I reported that I had got as far as the following:

Re-entering tasks. I’ve solved the problem of multiple re-entered tasks.

Simple to work. Yes.

Urgent stuff. Not as good as I’d like. This is the main failing, though I don’t want to give the impression that it makes the system unworkable - far from it.

Keeping the list short. The list is always kept short and  relevant throughout the day.

Getting tasks done. All unfinished tasks get worked on multiple times during the day.

Remembering tasks. I’ve solved the problem of multiple task entry.

Not deceiving yourself. Absolutely ideal for monitoring exactly how much you have succeeded in doing during a day.

I was in fact satisfied with everything except how the method dealt with urgent tasks. I’m pleased to say that I’ve now solved that problem too.

Using the system (including even its imperfect state) I have now blogged for 17 continuous days, set up a Facebook page, replied to 52 comments within a few hours at most, initiated reader’s questions, and advanced many things in my private life - all without any resistance or procrastination.

All I’ve got to do now is to work out how to make lots of money out of it!

Suggestions?

See also:

Why No-List Systems Work

Why "no list" systems work

Why do “no list” systems work, in spite of all our fears that we are going to miss something important?

And come to that why does a “no list” list work better than just not having a list at all?

I’m no psychologist, but my observations of myself, clients and the reported experiences of people writing in the forums on this site lead me to think that our minds like things like this:

• routines.
• tasks which they know how to do
• questions - just so long as they don’t feel under pressure to find a “right” answer

The sort of things our minds don’t like on the other hand are:

• unfinished tasks
• feeling out of their depth
• having to work for too long on one thing

They like freedom

They like to be challenged but not overwhelmed

They like building connections

They avoid things which they are afraid of, and they are afraid of being taken out of their comfort zones.

The very worst thing you can do with your mind is to overwhelm it with a huge list of stuff to do with not enough time to do it. This results in resistance and avoidance, either by giving up altogether or working on trivial stuff.

On the other hand the best thing you can do with your mind is to let it get on with what it wants to do but record it so it can see and learn. Your mind loves building things and it loves progressing things.

A “catch all” system always ends by either building resistance to the list, or by processing endless amounts of trivia.

A “no list” system on the other hand concentrates on what you are actually involved in, and because you are actively involved in the work your mind works with enthusiasm. And because the system actively constructs the list of what you have done, your mind is able to learn and adjust for maximum creativity.

More about "No List" Systems

“Any system that lets you wallow in the fantasy that one day you’ll get it all done isn’t just useless but dangerous, lulling you into frittering away your time.” (Oliver Burkeman)

As those who’ve read my book Secrets of Productive People will know, I advise people to throw away their to-do lists and rely on a “No List” system. There are two main reasons why I come down on the side of the “No List” system, one positive and one negative.

• The negative reason is that to do lists have an irresistible tendency to expand. This destroys real focus. I have taken “catch all” systems about as far as I can with AF and FV systems, but I’ve still never really succeeded in solving this problem with them.
• The positive reason is that a “No List” system has a remarkable effect on one’s mind, creativity and motivation.

A “catch all” to do list typically gets longer and longer, and even if it does level off it will still contain considerably more work than can be done in a day. The person using the list will typically lack focus and will not be progressing anything like as fast or as consistently as they would wish. This type of list may produce an illusion of work being done because a large number of tasks get actioned, but frequently all that’s really happening is that a lot of trivia is getting processed . As I say in the book, the ever-expanding list “refers to a never-never land where you magically get time to do all this work”

By contrast, the person working a “no list” system will quickly find that they quickly get into a routine. This routine can be consciously altered so that it works better and better, thus getting the routine work out of the way quickly. This then leaves more time for the important work. The “no list” user finds it easier to concentrate on a few key projects at a time, rather than diffuse their effort across multiple projects of varying importance.

So in the one case the result is haphazard working coupled with diffuse focus and intermittent effort. In the other case the result is stable work routines coupled with concentrated effort on the key priorities. Which to go for?

Types of Lists IX - An Effective "No List" System?

I put a question mark in the title of this post because I admit that I have not as yet succeeded in designing a system which fills all of the requirements I set myself.

How far have I got? Here’s my assessment of my new system so far.

Re-entering tasks. I’ve solved the problem of multiple re-entered tasks.

Simple to work. Yes.

Urgent stuff. Not as good as I’d like. This is the main failing, though I don’t want to give the impression that it makes the system unworkable - far from it.

Keeping the list short. The list is always kept short and  relevant throughout the day.

Getting tasks done. All unfinished tasks get worked on multiple times during the day.

Remembering tasks. I’ve solved the problem of multiple task entry.

Not deceiving yourself. Absolutely ideal for monitoring exactly how much you have succeeded in doing during a day.

Once I’ve improved how it handles urgent tasks this system will be amazing. It’s pretty amazing already!

This is the last in my series on Types of List.

If you found the series interesting and would like to support this website, especially the development of the effective “No List” system, then please give by clicking on the Donate button below.

Types of List VII - What do we need in a "No List" system?

In the previous articles in this series, my conclusion was that the “No List” list is the way of the future. But a list on its own is no use. We need a decent system to operate it.

Let’s have a look at what we would like to see from our “no list” time management system:

Re-entering tasks. A lot of the “no list” systems so far developed don’t include provision for re-entering tasks immediately. I think this is essential because the most effective way of dealing with a major task is with frequent bite-sized chunks. It’s how I’m writing this blog post for instance.

Simple to work. It needs to be simple to work. This is by and large a characteristic of “no list” systems so shouldn’t be a problem.

Urgent stuff. It should be possible to deal with an urgent task without leaving the system. This can be difficult to reconcile with the first requirement “Re-entering tasks”.

Keeping the list short. The whole point of a “no list” system is to stop the list growing long and irrelevant.

Getting tasks done. Once a task is on the list it gets done quickly. There should be no compromise about this.

Remembering tasks. A “no-list” system encourages you to think frequently about what needs to be done. However they are not good at processing more than two or three at a time. They are somewhat rigid about how you can enter tasks. I’d like to see some way of improving this.

Not deceiving yourself. “No list” systems make it virtually impossible to deceive yourself about how much you are actually doing. Any system which gets in the way of this should not be allowed.

Writing this blog post has made me realize that I have left out one contender from the Types of List - the Dynamic List. So tomorrow we will have a look at that.

Tomorrow:

The Dynamic List

Types of List VI - So which is best?

So which type of list is best? The answer to this question will be different from person to person because different people have different temperaments, circumstances and requirements.

But if we look at it from the point of view of which type of list is going to dominate in the evolutionary struggle of list versus list, then we may be able to come to an answer. For a long time now the “catch all” system has dominated when it comes to time management advice.

However useful “catch all” may have been in the past I think it’s days are numbered. The reason for this is the changing nature of work and leisure.

To go back a few hundred years, for the vast majority of the population their to-do list, if they’d written one, would have gone something like this:

Get up
Plough fields all day
Go to bed

or

Get up
Make shoes all day
Go to bed

or

Get Up
Do housework all day
Go to bed

Nowadays thankfully life is far more varied than that. But it comes at a price.  At least in the developed world the amount of choice we have both in our work and in our leisure increases day by day and the means of communication are multiplying too. We will soon have people entering the workforce who have never known what it is to live without a Smartphone.

This amount of choice poses a huge problem. The tendency is to try to follow up every opportunity that presents itself, regardless of the fact that it’s actually impossible to do so.

What we need is a time management method that a) encourages us to focus on a few things that are really important to us, and b) discourages us from doing other things that get in the way of the important stuff.

In this day and age time management needs to be at least as much about stopping yourself from doing things as about doing things.

The perpetual busyness and sense of overwhelm which afflict so many people is an illusion. All of us fill 24 hours a day with something - no more and no less. Our effectiveness will not come from succeeding in working 36 hours a day however hard we try to.

The secret is focus. We must each decide what our priorities are and ruthlessly weed out everything that doesn’t support those priorities.

It is the list that supports focus that will win the evolutionary stakes.

Let’s arrange the types of lists in the order in which they produce and support focus (least to most):

• Daily Open List. Lacks the focus of the daily and weekly lists. Can also result in only trivia being processed.
• “Catch all”. Positively encourages lack of focus. Also highly unmotivating due to the weight of undone stuff.
• Daily and Weekly Lists. Encourage a greater degree of focus. But still a tendency to leave a lot of work undone, often the most challenging.
• No list at all. Done properly this relies on well-thought out systems and routines. If these have been optimized, using no list at all can provide a good degree of focus.
• “No list” List. Facilitates the provision of systems and routines. Keeps focus firmly on what can be done during a day. Provides record of what has been done to base future days on.

My verdict:

“No list” Lists are challenging but the most focused. I am convinced that the future of time management lies with them.

Tomorrow:

What do we need in a “No list” list system?

Types of Lists IV - "No List" Lists

A “no list” list may sound like a contradiction in terms, but what it means is that you work at tasks with no list other than a short buffer list of about one to five items. You keep the buffer topped up by adding new tasks to replace the tasks you have finished working on.

The essential characteristic of a “no list” list is that you do not work off any form of master list. You decide what needs working on next in accordance with your knowledge of what needs to be done.

The shortest form of “no list” is just to write down the next thing you are going to do, immediately before you do it.

Whatever form of “no list” you use, you are continually forced throughout the day to ask yourself the question “What am I going to do next?”. At the end of the day you have a list of what you have actually done. By examining this you can get a better idea of exactly how much you can do in a day, what important things you are neglecting and what inessentials you are wasting time on.

An example of a “no list” system is the Productivity system found in my book “Secrets of Productive People”.

Although it may seem frightening at first to work with a “no list” system, they are very effective at quickly consolidating good low-level routines and systems into your work. These in their turn free you to concentrate on the high-level work.

My verdict:

Of the types of lists I have looked at so far in this series, a  “no list” list used properly is the most likely to be the winner in the evolutionary stakes. But we’ve still got one comparison yet to make.

Tomorrow:

Using no list at all