Navigation
To Think About . . .
My Latest Book
Also available on Amazon.com, Amazon.fr, and other Amazons and bookshops worldwide!
Search This Site
Log-in
Latest Comments
Most Popular Content
My Other Books
All Autofocus systems are like a gear. With the gear itself being the entire list and all the (I don't know the term in english) teeth being the equivalent of the pages. There are actually 2 different kinds of revolutions inside the system. The first one is obviously the cycling through a page. This makes you work on that stuff a lot but keeps you from going forward. You are stuck in 1st gear in a car or on a bike if you will. It is powerful and you can climb mountains but you won't go fast anywhere.
The second is the cycling through all the system. It takes more time to go through one iteration of the loop but the mileage on it is quite considerable. For long span projects, this use of the system is quite effective. It is equivalent to being in 5th gear on your car or 3rd speed on your bicycle.
Notice the gap?
If you want to go for the mileage, you have to get out of first gear.
Now Superfocus answered a crucial problem,... It's hard to go from 1st gear to 5th gear.
If you have say the 3rd gear of a car or the second speed of a bike, then the transition is easier and more automatic. Superfocus does this with the second column. It let's you bring an item forward with you to the next page (third type of loop). That loop has the power of the first kind of loop and the mileage of the second type of loop.
Seraphim, you are stuck in 1st gear, there is no other way to go faster then to shift gear! And I'm sorry to say that longer pages will only give you longer second columns, it will most probably cripple you more then help. Try 10 lines per page, you'll go through fast enough and won't put stuff C2 that much, and if you do, you'll only dismiss stuff (that's cool). That's at least what a friend of mine has tried recently and it works great...
Last thing...
Things you put in your list are your commitments. They change depending on situation and environment. If you have a big list and taking a cup of coffee is something important to you, the longer the list, the less often you will get to it. You can absolutely and reasonably have the commitment of taking 3 cups of coffee while you cycle your system once!
Agreed, but you are already going too slow through your list and that skews the definition of when you get to the item. It only acerbate the problem. I don't say not to pull stuff if you feel like it but just think twice on what it will do to the system. It's like pulling cars on the highway from the in-way on rush hour. A jam is the only result that can happen!!!
<<< And I'm sorry to say that longer pages will only give you longer second columns, it will most probably cripple you more then help. >>>
Here is the reasoning why longer pages should help the system move faster.
(1) It makes the page count shorter. This makes it easier to cycle through the pages. The last page with the newest tasks is only 1-2 pages away, rather than 4-5 pages away. This reduces the urge to put things in C2, since I'm more likely to get to them pretty soon anyway "in the normal process of working the system."
(2) C2 does not fill as quickly. This reduces pressure to finish C1 tasks in one go -- which reduces the tendency of C1 tasks to "stand out". With smaller pages, that pressure from C2 filling up is very strong, making it much more likely for C1 tasks to stand out, which slows down the overall progress.
(3) The stress on C2 from (1) and (2), above, is reduced, which means subsequent pages also have fewer C2 items to deal with.
(4) Fewer C2 items means that you don't cycle each page as many times, which further reduces the number of C1 items that stand out, which further speeds up the cycling through the overall list.
I've only just begun using a notebook with longer pages, so I don't know how it will work out in practice, but the reasoning (inspired by Bob Pankratz's post at http://www.markforster.net/forum/post/1424127 ) makes sense to me.
<<< Try 10 lines per page, you'll go through fast enough and won't put stuff C2 that much, and if you do, you'll only dismiss stuff (that's cool). That's at least what a friend of mine has tried recently and it works great... >>>
Yes, I can see how it can force you to dismiss things faster, especially through C2 filling up quickly. But that's not the ideal way for dismissal to happen. Dismissal is more useful when it happens after repeated exposure to the task -- and failure to act despite the repeated exposure. If your list is dominated by stuff that is "maybe I'd like to do this someday" kinds of tasks, then perhaps fast dismissal is OK. But my list doesn't have a lot of that kind of task in it.
<<< Things you put in your list are your commitments. >>>
No, not really.
It's a list of everything I feel I must do, should do, would like to do, or someday/maybe would like to do, or things I am not sure how important or urgent they are yet.
It includes not only tasks but ideas to explore; notes from meetings that need more thought before action can be defined; etc.
Back in the AF1 days we often joked on the forum that you could put anything from "walk the dog" or "clip your nails" to "start a company" or "conquer the world", and the list would process it effectively.
Not everything in life is necessarily attached to a commitment. Putting it on my list actually helps me decide whether or not it is something to which I should make a commitment.
<<< If you have a big list and taking a cup of coffee is something important to you, the longer the list, the less often you will get to it. You can absolutely and reasonably have the commitment of taking 3 cups of coffee while you cycle your system once! >>>
I'm not sure what your point is here, but here are my thoughts - I hope they are relevant.
If I were thinking of grabbing a cup of coffee, but it was more than a 30-second exercise to do so, I'd write it in Column 2 and act when it stood out. Or perhaps I'd go when my coworkers stop by and ask if I'd like to walk down to the cafeteria for a coffee break.
If I were addicted to coffee, and trying to limit my intake, I'd be more likely to add it to Column 1 and try not to act on it unless it stood out -- but if it were just driving me crazy I'd add it in Column 2 and act on it when it stood out.
Sorry for the brusk replies, I try to do this fast today.
<<I'm not sure what your point is here, but here are my thoughts - I hope they are relevant.>>
The relevance is between the first thing I said and the second. Please don't separate them or take to the word what I said as commitment. Say it's something you may want to do if you want. What I wanted to say is that you can have 2 times a recurring task in your system without it being a problem.
<<Dismissal is more useful when it happens after repeated exposure to the task>>
I agree but not while cycling inside the same page a number of times. If you cycle a page 15 times before going to the next, the exposure is just once.With 10 lines per pages, if you act on 1 item on each page on each pass, you will get much better exposure in my mind. And dismiss will happen not as often as you might imagine. We actually tried it at 5 lines per page for a week for him to get the feel of the mechanics and the flow of the system and then ramped it up a notch. The real benefit is that C2 is almost not used or just when REALLY needed.
<<< What I wanted to say is that you can have 2 times a recurring task in your system without it being a problem. >>>
No argument there.
<<< If you cycle a page 15 times before going to the next, the exposure is just once. >>>
That's not how it works in my experience. Often, nothing in C1 stands out when I first read through the page. But something in C2 stands out. Then I cycle through C1 and C2 again, and now, reading C1 for a second time this visit, some of the resistance has broken down, and one or two things in C1 stand out. I keep cycling, and with each cycle, the repeated exposure does tend to decrease the resistance and increase the likelihood of something standing out.
<<< With 10 lines per pages, if you act on 1 item on each page on each pass, you will get much better exposure in my mind. >>>
I suppose this could work if you add a new rule, "Act on no more than 1 item in C1 during each visit to the page." I don't think it works so well if you follow the original rules, "Keep cycling through the page till nothing else stands out."
I'll add this to my "things to try" but it seems like a pretty big change to the original rules.
(I don't advocate a rule to do just one thing per page,. In my experience, the normal rules are perfect for a 10 lines book)
"1 item on each page"
You don't have to change the rules, if you can just set this expectation in your mind. Then you should find that things don't stick out so much. But if a couple of things do stick out, you still work on them.
Do you remember how things went with AF4 Seraphim?
<<< Do you remember how things went with AF4 Seraphim? >>>
Yes, for me it was basically the same as AF1 - ever-growing list, always chasing the end of the list, once I broke out out the "Backlog"/"Closed List" it would be days or weeks before I entered it again. I think I had left it behind for over a month when DWM came along and I started using that instead.
I'd like an update about this thread's situation...
From the essay, I gather that you dismiss more then before and have eliminated a lot of "less then necessary" stuff or am I totally off track?
Long answer: See below. :-)
So far, I decided to go back to ALL the original SF rules and follow them strictly. (I was trying for a couple weeks to enter urgent items in C2 on the next page, to try to get the system to go faster; but I have stopped doing that, mostly.)
The only real change I implemented was to use a larger notebook. This does seem to make progress through the book proceed more quickly, and helps prevent C2 overload. (I miss being able to carry the notebook in my pocket, however.)
I did start dismissing more, but this hasn't really been a conscious effort. It started happening because I realized that I could try to follow the SF rules strictly at all times -- even when I'm sick and would normally just cherry-pick a few things to do. This realization somehow freed me to strictly follow the "standing out" rules at all times, and dismiss whenever the rules say to dismiss.
I'm still having trouble "chasing the end of the list" and moving slowly -- but it's not too bad, not anywhere near as bad as it was with AF1 or AF4. I've only got 11 active pages which is probably about 250 active tasks. When I was this far into it with AF1/AF4, I already had at least 800 tasks.
Part of this is because SF is just better. Part of it is that I've learned better habits as a result of using all of Mark's systems (thus increasing my brain power, as per Mark's recent blog post!).
To answer your question, "have you eliminated a lot of 'less then necessary' stuff" -- I think I put in just as much ideas and random thoughts and odds and ends as I always have. Some of them get processed more quickly -- especially if they are rather large in scope and/or require creative energy -- I move those into Outlook reminders set for 3 months from now, since I am just too busy at work to deal with them right now and I don't even want to see them in SF.
Anyway this is kind of long but I hope it answers your questions. And I hope you are doing OK in Japan!! :-)
Seraphim, thank you for sharing so much of your experience in so much detail and being such a willing troubleshooting subject right out in public. I too am impressed at how well the dialog went and how constructive it has remained.
Though I have never had even close to 1200 tasks, my progression learning SF has been similar to yours, and it looks like you and I have similar personality types. Tweaks that I think of trying, you often have already tried and reported on. It is very encouraging to see that you are now following the rules strictly and finding the system more effective.
Today I realized that my "today list" has begun to harbor things that really ought to be in C1. This began as my pace through the list lagged, and I began to feel anxious about the pages I haven't seen in a while. So, I started to resist writing things in C1 if they are "kind of urgent," for fear they would disappear for too long. I am now realizing that this is a message from SF: "you are moving to slowly through the list (and going off-book too much!); put everything in the system, be more selective on each page, and work littler and more often."
I just finished moving these things back into C1, and I am going to let that anxiety affect my feeling of "ready to be done," hoping it will pull me through the list. If I'm so anxious about being stuck on this page that I'm not writing new items in C1, then I guess nothing on this page is really "ready to be done," eh?
That's a little tricky for me, because I tend to have a pretty warped sense of time, thinking that a thing will take ten minutes but then spending over an hour on it (ahem, it is nearly 1:30 am here as I write this). I can't expect any time management system to fix that for me automatically, but SF is the first to push me to take it seriously (that is, not blame it on "too much to do" or say, "well that's just how I am"); instead, I am really wanting to work on it now and feeling like the payoff will be worth it. I once had some success to this end with time boxing, so I will get my timer out again tomorrow.
Despite my struggles with C1/C2/etc., this is an example of why I am so happy with SF. SF's feedback is incredibly concrete and useful and constructive, much more so than other systems I have used. When things go wrong, I feel like I am actually learning something rather than simply failing, and the fix (i.e., being more selective on each page) is something I can visualize doing without undue pain or resistance.
Thank you to everyone who invested time in this thread.
It's a good learning experience, and everyone has so many good ideas!
<< I too am impressed at how well the dialog went and how constructive it has remained. >>
Yes, this forum has always been like that -- it's great!
<< it looks like you and I have similar personality types. >>
I also got that impression from many of your posts -- they really resonate with me. :-)
<< It is very encouraging to see that you are now following the rules strictly and finding the system more effective. >>
Yes I am encouraged by that too. :-)
<< Today I realized that my "today list" has begun to harbor things that really ought to be in C1. >>
The whole "today list" idea still hasn't "stood out" so I am continuing to happily abuse C2 with my daily recurring tasks. :-)
<< I am now realizing that this is a message from SF: "you are moving to slowly through the list (and going off-book too much!); put everything in the system, be more selective on each page, and work littler and more often." >>
I'm still not so sure I know what to do when SF sends me a message like that. I guess I'll have to wait and see if SF can continue to teach me better habits. I can still very easily spend all day working a single page. Trying to work littler and more often doesn't always make sense.
<< If I'm so anxious about being stuck on this page that I'm not writing new items in C1, then I guess nothing on this page is really "ready to be done," eh? >>
For me, it's the opposite. TOO MANY of the items in C1 are standing out -- that's why I get stuck on a single page. And the longer I remain there, the more things stand out. The building pressure of the growing number of new pages helps prevent things from standing out, but not enough to counter-balance the tasks that are right in front of me.
<< That's a little tricky for me, because I tend to have a pretty warped sense of time, thinking that a thing will take ten minutes but then spending over an hour on it >>
Yeah, I have that problem too. :-)
Anyone know how to build a negative gravitational field of relativistic proportions? I'd like the rest of the universe to slow down while I get caught up. :-)
<< I can't expect any time management system to fix that for me automatically >>
Hm, the contrarian in me immediately says, "Oh yeah? Prove it!!" :-)
It makes me wonder if there's anything a minor rule adjustment might be able to do that would make us more aware of the passing time...
For a few weeks, I'd start a countdown timer every time I started a new task in DWM (or was it SF already? can't remember). I'd set it for 20 minutes. I just could NOT believe how fast that 20 minutes would fly by. After a few weeks it did help to give me a better sense of time, and a greater sense of urgency in getting right into the new tasks and not dilly-dallying around it.
It's not really a rule adjustment but it's a useful technique nonetheless. Maybe I could just write the starting time next to each task in the SF notebook when I start it and get a feel for the time expenditure that way.
<< SF's feedback is incredibly concrete and useful and constructive, much more so than other systems I have used. When things go wrong, I feel like I am actually learning something rather than simply failing >>
Yes, this is a big reason why I like SF (and Mark's other AF systems) so much.
"It makes me wonder if there's anything a minor rule adjustment might be able to do that would make us more aware of the passing time... "
The Pomodoro rule tweak for SF:
The infamous tomoato timer system has you work 25 minutes, break 5, repeat 3 more times for two hours of productive work. After 4 tomatoes of work you celebrate or something.
So in SF with a Pomodoro tweak, you must turn the page after 4 tomatoes or less. If after 3 you've got lots of c2s around, the last Pomo will focus on moving each of them forward so you can escape. You may turn the page long before 4 periods are up. Restart the count on the next page.
Have fun (or go nuts)!
I just red your post and wish to answer about a major point.
I won't give any lesson. I am just a learner. But some events in my life gave my some good lessons I would share with you. May be it will help you and some others and I received so much from many of you that it's the less I could do.
You seems "over committed'
There could be 2 reason one because your boss want to slave you more and more, second because you'r a serious man and so you want to do your best.
Let me tell you a story. 5 years ago I was working in a big French assurance company and did my best for my job. I worked harder and harder. Did my best, took all commitments possible and finally i was fired not because I was inefficient but because I needed too much for others. It was hard for me but I decided to create my own company and since I did, it is a success. But this time the rules were said by myself then they were more difficult to realize. The situation began little by little very hard to control. Then I discovered GTD and later MF site. I thought this was the end of my problem. But no.
Anyway with the help of all what I read here and everywhere I now understand 2 or 3 things it's not much and it's the common sense but I am going to share it with you.
1. You are not Superman. Do your best but not more
2. Think to you first and after to others. What could you do without health ? You won't be able to serve others. Then be good and love you first. Then you will be able to give to other and love them.
3. SF, GTD are systems. There are interesting but no enough. You must think first to the nature of your work and find solution to make others working for you. I red somewhere that someone dismissed the same tasks all the time in SF. He suddenly realized that he Hated this activity. So he delegated it to a friend who loved it and it was a success. We are not good in everything, accept it and try to give and receive from others.
4. Remember Pareto 80 % of the success is done with 20% of action. So you spend 80% of your time doing nothing useful but you must do it if you want to reach the 20%. But may be you can do better. I recently realized that there are 2 kinds of task actionable and not actionable. I wrote some threads about this. (ie MF site - context GTD). I put all my actionable tasks on SF and the Non actionable task in Omnifocus it's much better. One time I will spend 80% of my time on the 20% and will increase my success.
5. Remember the golden rule choosing is trashing. Use Dismiss if you can't do something there is a raison. Dismiss too everywhere. Trash a lot it's your best friend after your wife and your dog. LOL. If you suddenly die what will be left ? Nothing. When I realized that I changed my life and my behavior with others. I now live a rich life even I have like others many difficulties but I have the real feeling of living. Doing many tasks sometime is only a way to forget our own weakness among the universe.
So carefully choose your tasks, don't let people decide for you, think regularly about what you are and where you want to go, and try to make the best choice for controlling your life and not being controlled by it and see it in perspective.
The rule of life is quiet unfair. You know you'r here but no for how long.
Nobody knows what time is left.
So live your life, do the wright things and even if you die at 150 years old spent each day as it would be the last and make the right choice in every domains.
Have fun (or go nuts)!>>
Alan, I think it will be "go nuts" for me!
I do like timers, though for me their main value comes by insulating me from the clock. If I have four hours before I need to pick up my son, for example, I may set the timer for two and dive into something. I can *completely* forget about time, because the timer is watching my back, and I know I'll have plenty of time left to deal with whatever else is on my list.
My brief Pomodoro experiment was excruciating, mostly due to the tiny 25 minute window. The timer too often rang when I was really getting something done and had no need to stop, so it seemed counterproductive. But I could imagine a more relaxed version of Pomodoro working for me. It would definitely have longer blocks (45 minutes at least!) and would be less rigid about counting them up.
If I have 13 pages and about 10 hours per day of time working the list, that gives about 45 minutes per page (MAX) to get through the whole list once/day.
I just started doing this today and it's been pretty weird -- I am getting through the pages MUCH faster than usual, and generally in 20 minutes or less. I also find that I naturally gravitate toward the C2 tasks and knock most of them out quickly, then act on a few C1 tasks, then linger on any remaining C2 tasks as long as I want.
I like this MUCH better than using Pomodoro on a per-task basis. That never worked for me at all.
It's just the first day that I'm doing this, but since it's working so well and seemed to be relevant, I thought I'd mention it...
<< I'm trying a new experiment - starting a timer for the PAGE, not for the task. >>
I just came across this old post of yours while looking for something else. How did it pan out?
Wow, so many interesting old discussions. Fascinating how the themes recur in different forms.
I don't remember how that experiment played out in the end. But I am finding myself doing something similar with my AF4R experiment. I have my three page types -- New, Unfinished, and Recurring. There are days when I find myself getting pulled into one category of tasks, and the other categories are neglected. For example, I may have a lot of Unfinished tasks, and I might inadvertently focus on them exclusively, with the result that I fall behind on my inboxes, or neglect urgent tasks on my New list.
So I have been trying the following --
-- I set a time limit (maybe 30-60 minutes) to get through whatever category of pages I am working on.
-- I do an FV-style task selection within those pages, and try to pace my work so that I get all the selected tasks completed within the time limit.
-- After the time expires, I stop and move on to the next page type.
For example, I might start the day with 30 minutes dedicated to the Unfinished tasks, and select three of those tasks to work on. When the timer is done, I move on to the New tasks, and set the timer again. Then move on to the Recurring tasks, and set the timer again.
This helps to get things moving and give an appropriate balance to the different kinds of tasks. It gives me a good sense of the work of the day.
I don't always use the timer. After I have a good pace and a good sense of what I want to get done that day, I stop using the timer.