Discussion Forum > Experimenting with Systems
Zeloc,
You state: "No one can argue with an idea that has worked for 3 months." Yes one can. I know that there is at least one person on this forum who has used the same system successfully for 3 months, but is now finding issues with it.
And I think many of us have come to the conclusion that it is probably a fool's errand to try to "optimize" a single system that will work for every individual.
Part of the fun we have on this forum is discussing personalized tweaks to Mark's systems. Perhaps we're all weird, and prefer spending some of our time tinkering with productivity systems, rather than (merely) being 100% productive. :-)
You state: "No one can argue with an idea that has worked for 3 months." Yes one can. I know that there is at least one person on this forum who has used the same system successfully for 3 months, but is now finding issues with it.
And I think many of us have come to the conclusion that it is probably a fool's errand to try to "optimize" a single system that will work for every individual.
Part of the fun we have on this forum is discussing personalized tweaks to Mark's systems. Perhaps we're all weird, and prefer spending some of our time tinkering with productivity systems, rather than (merely) being 100% productive. :-)
August 27, 2011 at 2:30 |
ubi
ubi
For me, I believe there is an aspect of experimentation at work here that is really valuable and positive no matter how often an idea is tried and found wanting. This kind of experimentation leads to a growth of new and original ideas and so I welcome it. Of course, I also welcome input from people who have tried a system for a long time, this also has its own value. For example, there is always a danger of changing a system too quickly before giving it a chance. I find this especially true of well meaning folk from outside this forum who read about autofocus and dismiss it for being too simplistic. The key for me is probably just simple honesty. If a new system appeals to me and doesn't sound like it's too risky, I'll try it. If something better comes along I'll try it, too. Occasionally I'll try and comment on it, maybe my suggestions will lead to new and better ideas. Or not.
By the way, it's not only Mark's systems that I enjoy reading about, I also enjoy reading about other people's ideas, too, some of which are remarkably original and very helpful.
By the way, it's not only Mark's systems that I enjoy reading about, I also enjoy reading about other people's ideas, too, some of which are remarkably original and very helpful.
August 27, 2011 at 4:05 |
Paul MacNeil
Paul MacNeil
Zeloc:
<< Why don't all of us experiment with various ideas, but delay discussing the results unless we were able to maintain the habit for 3 months.>>
That's not going to leave us much to write about!
But seriously, the main use of the forum for me is not so much other people's solutions but other people's problems. The only person whose problems I know first-hand is myself so it's important for me to know how various systems are working out in practice with other people. For that the failures are as important as the successes.
<< Why don't all of us experiment with various ideas, but delay discussing the results unless we were able to maintain the habit for 3 months.>>
That's not going to leave us much to write about!
But seriously, the main use of the forum for me is not so much other people's solutions but other people's problems. The only person whose problems I know first-hand is myself so it's important for me to know how various systems are working out in practice with other people. For that the failures are as important as the successes.
August 27, 2011 at 10:01 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Three questions cross my mind here:
1) How do I want to work? What would the ideal system regarding my personality and my goals look like?
2) How do the requirements of my workplace, job, and situations force me to work? And how does this influence the answer given to question #1?
3) How do I handle surprises, interruptions, and new positive opportunities? Are the answers to #1 and #2 apt to help with these?
1) How do I want to work? What would the ideal system regarding my personality and my goals look like?
2) How do the requirements of my workplace, job, and situations force me to work? And how does this influence the answer given to question #1?
3) How do I handle surprises, interruptions, and new positive opportunities? Are the answers to #1 and #2 apt to help with these?
August 27, 2011 at 12:11 |
Rainer
Rainer
I'm one who used a system for over 3 months before abandoning it. The latest casualty was Superfocus, which even after much successful use felt tedious and complicated. Also it doesn't suit me for days like today where there are several must-dos.
One year ago I started a system which also served me several months, which was especially good at collecting and processing must-dos. Only it got tedious after those were covered. Now a new idea arises that attempts to combine the best of SF, My System, the random notebook, DIT, ideas from Dreams. How can I say no?
Incidentally, a good system is 90% effective at getting stuff done, an okay one 75%, and a poor one 20% leading to rapid abandonment of that system. A 75% solution means usually it gets used, occasionally bypassed, and occasionally failing as in something didn't happen that should have. 90% is extremely valued. Yet that 95% still feels achievable.
One year ago I started a system which also served me several months, which was especially good at collecting and processing must-dos. Only it got tedious after those were covered. Now a new idea arises that attempts to combine the best of SF, My System, the random notebook, DIT, ideas from Dreams. How can I say no?
Incidentally, a good system is 90% effective at getting stuff done, an okay one 75%, and a poor one 20% leading to rapid abandonment of that system. A 75% solution means usually it gets used, occasionally bypassed, and occasionally failing as in something didn't happen that should have. 90% is extremely valued. Yet that 95% still feels achievable.
August 27, 2011 at 13:02 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
"Why don't all of us experiment with various ideas, but delay discussing the results unless we were able to maintain the habit for 3 months."
I think often the best ideas come from other ideas, combined with careful thinking, experimenting, sharing for feedback, and synthesis. If it doesn't survive 3 months it's true it isn't the best, but it's still valuable to the discussion. That said, detailed systems are probably less useful unless fully tested and proven
I think often the best ideas come from other ideas, combined with careful thinking, experimenting, sharing for feedback, and synthesis. If it doesn't survive 3 months it's true it isn't the best, but it's still valuable to the discussion. That said, detailed systems are probably less useful unless fully tested and proven
August 27, 2011 at 15:27 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Alan:
<< Incidentally, a good system is 90% effective at getting stuff done, an okay one 75%, and a poor one 20% leading to rapid abandonment of that system. >>
How would you define a system that was 100% effective at getting stuff done?
<< Incidentally, a good system is 90% effective at getting stuff done, an okay one 75%, and a poor one 20% leading to rapid abandonment of that system. >>
How would you define a system that was 100% effective at getting stuff done?
August 27, 2011 at 15:38 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Oops I meant to define that. By 95% I meant that I'm completely happy to use it 19 days out of 20, so it would only be 1 working day per month I feel dissatisfied.
August 27, 2011 at 16:10 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
My new system is much better than SF at dealing with must do's, surprises, interruptions and new positive opportunities, so maybe you'll be happy to use it at least 19 days out of 20!
August 27, 2011 at 16:26 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
That sounds very promising, Mark. Do you already know when you will release it?
August 27, 2011 at 16:30 |
Rainer
Rainer
<< My new system is much better than SF at dealing with must do's ...>>
Mark, those must-do's are the chief reason I maintain a "dashboard." Working in AF/SF, in addition to a calendar for appointments, I need a dashboard to keep the non-calendar must-do's in front of me.
Okay, perhaps instead of "need," I should say "feel lost without." There are other items on my dashboard, such as errands, but it's the muist-do's that force me to update the dashboard *every* *night* and keep me swiveling my head from the notebook to the dashboard and back throughout the day.
So if you have succeeded in integrating those must-do's, then that is music to my ears!
Mark, those must-do's are the chief reason I maintain a "dashboard." Working in AF/SF, in addition to a calendar for appointments, I need a dashboard to keep the non-calendar must-do's in front of me.
Okay, perhaps instead of "need," I should say "feel lost without." There are other items on my dashboard, such as errands, but it's the muist-do's that force me to update the dashboard *every* *night* and keep me swiveling my head from the notebook to the dashboard and back throughout the day.
So if you have succeeded in integrating those must-do's, then that is music to my ears!
August 27, 2011 at 17:11 |
Bernie
Bernie
Bernie: to stop that swivellng, have you thought of reformatting your dashboard to be a page in your notebook?
August 27, 2011 at 17:29 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Zeloc - fantastic post. And I suspect (I'm not going to make many friends w/ this observation) that most productivity talk/tweaks are misguided creative projects. It feels as if you're onto something special, but very little substance is going on. Which is why I like your suggestion. I.e 3 months. However I'd add on this qualifier: Tell me about a project you care about... something that causes resistance. Then go to work, and don't report back until you can provide evidence that your system helped you accomplish whatever you set out to do.
Merlin Mann said it best with "first care". When I violate that principle, I get excited about Mark's (whom I respect & support) new systems.
Merlin Mann said it best with "first care". When I violate that principle, I get excited about Mark's (whom I respect & support) new systems.
August 27, 2011 at 17:37 |
avrum
avrum
Rainer:
<< Do you already know when you will release it? >>
Not before three months, I would think.
<< Do you already know when you will release it? >>
Not before three months, I would think.
August 27, 2011 at 17:50 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
<< Not before three months, I would think. >>
LOL!! Mark I love your sense of humor.
LOL!! Mark I love your sense of humor.
August 27, 2011 at 18:12 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
After writing this post, I can't figure out if it's on topic or not… Please forgive me if it takes the thread in an unintended direction.
I've been following a particular thread of development in my own self-management but have resisted posting too much about it for the very reasons Zeloc mentions. Will this be a sustainable system, or not? Will it become an old habit, like an old comfortable shoe? Or will I keep tweaking and refining it?
I am always learning from other people's best practices, and always growing myself and learning new things -- so based on that, I don't think the tweaking and refining will ever end. But I'd like to keep the "revolutionary new system!!" earthquakes to a minimum.
Ultimately, I'd really like to find a single good pair of shoes that will become my "old comfortable shoes" that might need a good new shine now and then, maybe some new shoelaces, rarely a new sole. But overall it's a good reliable pair of shoes and I can always just rely on them.
Failing that, I'd at least like to find a reliable brand of shoes that I can buy when the old ones get worn out. That's what this site is like for me. DIT, AFx, DWM, SFx, 1-2-X, whatever it is, it's the Mark Forster brand, and I know it will be useful, reliable, enjoyable, help me get my work done, and help me learn something about myself. So it's not the 100% perfect system… Ultimately, does that really even matter?
Before finding DIT and AF, I had never found a pair of shoes I could really rely on. The shoes just never fit, I couldn't even walk comfortably. It was easier just to go without shoes.
But now, here were several different pairs of shoes, and they all fit pretty well, they helped me run faster, they helped me get where I wanted to go. I started getting work done, started to feel on top of my work, started to accomplish my real goals more effectively.
I started worrying less about the fit of my shoes, and how it was affecting my gait and posture, and instead could focus on the walking, maybe running, but most of all, on getting to where I wanted to go.
And ultimately, the desire to try different shoes, and especially to try different brands, just faded away.
It's still interesting to discuss, and I happily get caught up in the anticipation of Mark's latest system as much as anyone else! But there isn't nearly the feeling that "Maybe this new system will save me!!" that I used to get. I'm just too busy actually getting my job done and accomplishing my ultimate goals.
Isn't that what it's all about?
So, whether we wait 3 months, 3 days, or 3 minutes to share our latest tweaks and ideas, at least we all have this in common -- we're all happy customers of the Mark Forster brand. Which reminds me, I haven't clicked that Paypal Donate button at the top of the page recently… :-)
I've been following a particular thread of development in my own self-management but have resisted posting too much about it for the very reasons Zeloc mentions. Will this be a sustainable system, or not? Will it become an old habit, like an old comfortable shoe? Or will I keep tweaking and refining it?
I am always learning from other people's best practices, and always growing myself and learning new things -- so based on that, I don't think the tweaking and refining will ever end. But I'd like to keep the "revolutionary new system!!" earthquakes to a minimum.
Ultimately, I'd really like to find a single good pair of shoes that will become my "old comfortable shoes" that might need a good new shine now and then, maybe some new shoelaces, rarely a new sole. But overall it's a good reliable pair of shoes and I can always just rely on them.
Failing that, I'd at least like to find a reliable brand of shoes that I can buy when the old ones get worn out. That's what this site is like for me. DIT, AFx, DWM, SFx, 1-2-X, whatever it is, it's the Mark Forster brand, and I know it will be useful, reliable, enjoyable, help me get my work done, and help me learn something about myself. So it's not the 100% perfect system… Ultimately, does that really even matter?
Before finding DIT and AF, I had never found a pair of shoes I could really rely on. The shoes just never fit, I couldn't even walk comfortably. It was easier just to go without shoes.
But now, here were several different pairs of shoes, and they all fit pretty well, they helped me run faster, they helped me get where I wanted to go. I started getting work done, started to feel on top of my work, started to accomplish my real goals more effectively.
I started worrying less about the fit of my shoes, and how it was affecting my gait and posture, and instead could focus on the walking, maybe running, but most of all, on getting to where I wanted to go.
And ultimately, the desire to try different shoes, and especially to try different brands, just faded away.
It's still interesting to discuss, and I happily get caught up in the anticipation of Mark's latest system as much as anyone else! But there isn't nearly the feeling that "Maybe this new system will save me!!" that I used to get. I'm just too busy actually getting my job done and accomplishing my ultimate goals.
Isn't that what it's all about?
So, whether we wait 3 months, 3 days, or 3 minutes to share our latest tweaks and ideas, at least we all have this in common -- we're all happy customers of the Mark Forster brand. Which reminds me, I haven't clicked that Paypal Donate button at the top of the page recently… :-)
August 27, 2011 at 18:38 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Seraphim:
<< Which reminds me, I haven't clicked that Paypal Donate button at the top of the page recently… :-) >>
Nor has anyone else! :-)
<< Which reminds me, I haven't clicked that Paypal Donate button at the top of the page recently… :-) >>
Nor has anyone else! :-)
August 27, 2011 at 18:43 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Zeloc,
I agree with you key message, which I think is about scientifically, or objectively testing and evaluating a chosen time management sytem rigorously over a set period of time.
I personally chop, change & tweak shiny new systems like you wouldn't believe - but I guess part of it is almost a hobby (and obsession).
I would LOVE to work a system, untweaked for 3 months - that would be a massive achievement for me.
Where do I sign up?!?
I agree with you key message, which I think is about scientifically, or objectively testing and evaluating a chosen time management sytem rigorously over a set period of time.
I personally chop, change & tweak shiny new systems like you wouldn't believe - but I guess part of it is almost a hobby (and obsession).
I would LOVE to work a system, untweaked for 3 months - that would be a massive achievement for me.
Where do I sign up?!?
August 27, 2011 at 20:52 |
leon
leon
<<< After writing this post, I can't figure out if it's on topic or not… Please forgive me if it takes the thread in an unintended direction. >>>
Off topic and unintended direction are different things. Off topic I don't like, unintended directions --> excellent!
<<< Ultimately, I'd really like to find a single good pair of shoes that will become my "old comfortable shoes" that might need a good new shine now and then, maybe some new shoelaces, rarely a new sole. But overall it's a good reliable pair of shoes and I can always just rely on them. >>>
I have a difference of opinion here because I used a system effectively for 3 years at work and I knew it worked, I was getting a lot done, and there were no downsides. I felt that I was reaching the limits of human productivity and there was no reason to change anything. Now it doesn't deal with distractions (eg, if I get distracted and not do anything productive), and it was a different situation because there was an enormous amount of pressure and an extreme number of urgent and important tasks, so the experiment which I started yesterday is to see whether I can apply this system to my home life. I actually had to formally come up with rules for what I did before because I didn't design that system in advance, it simply happened to deal with the enormous pressures I was under and I refined it automatically out of necessity. I don't currently work in the same position.
Regarding some of the criticism of my 3 month idea due to the utility of exploring and discussing new new systems for lesser periods of time, I came up with an idea: let's just preface the discussion by how long one has been trying it. It could become standard before discussing any idea to say how long you have been using it.
I also agree that there could be different systems for different persons, and experimentation would still get us to a smaller number of good systems even if there isn't an ideal system (although I happen to believe that there is).
How do people show quotations here? I tried the HTML but in the preview it didn't work so I just did it manually.
Off topic and unintended direction are different things. Off topic I don't like, unintended directions --> excellent!
<<< Ultimately, I'd really like to find a single good pair of shoes that will become my "old comfortable shoes" that might need a good new shine now and then, maybe some new shoelaces, rarely a new sole. But overall it's a good reliable pair of shoes and I can always just rely on them. >>>
I have a difference of opinion here because I used a system effectively for 3 years at work and I knew it worked, I was getting a lot done, and there were no downsides. I felt that I was reaching the limits of human productivity and there was no reason to change anything. Now it doesn't deal with distractions (eg, if I get distracted and not do anything productive), and it was a different situation because there was an enormous amount of pressure and an extreme number of urgent and important tasks, so the experiment which I started yesterday is to see whether I can apply this system to my home life. I actually had to formally come up with rules for what I did before because I didn't design that system in advance, it simply happened to deal with the enormous pressures I was under and I refined it automatically out of necessity. I don't currently work in the same position.
Regarding some of the criticism of my 3 month idea due to the utility of exploring and discussing new new systems for lesser periods of time, I came up with an idea: let's just preface the discussion by how long one has been trying it. It could become standard before discussing any idea to say how long you have been using it.
I also agree that there could be different systems for different persons, and experimentation would still get us to a smaller number of good systems even if there isn't an ideal system (although I happen to believe that there is).
How do people show quotations here? I tried the HTML but in the preview it didn't work so I just did it manually.
August 27, 2011 at 22:23 |
Zeloc
Zeloc
Zeloc:
<< I used a system effectively for 3 years at work and I knew it worked, I was getting a lot done, and there were no downsides. I felt that I was reaching the limits of human productivity and there was no reason to change anything. >>
That sounds exciting. Are you willing to tell us how it works?
<< I used a system effectively for 3 years at work and I knew it worked, I was getting a lot done, and there were no downsides. I felt that I was reaching the limits of human productivity and there was no reason to change anything. >>
That sounds exciting. Are you willing to tell us how it works?
August 27, 2011 at 22:27 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Alan,
<< Bernie: to stop that swivellng, have you thought of reformatting your dashboard to be a page in your notebook? >>
I print the dashboard nightly from my computer, so no, I would not want to convert it to a notebook page at this point (which I presume would be hand-written into the notebook).
The dashboard has some detailed components that rarely change, such as daily checklists and a small six-week calendar, and a running list of errands. Those things work nicely on a dashboard, because they don't need updating every night, and they are the wrong sorts of things to put on a task list.
The part that doesn't work, and would be wonderful to move into the notebook, are the must-do items, especially the ones that are due 2-3 days from now. In AF/SF, those items threaten to turn the notebook into a treadmill, where one has to maintain a minimum page-turn rate to know that nothing critical has been overlooked. Moving those items out of the notebook makes it easier for me to scan them, at the cost of diverting attention from the notebook. Since these notebook systems thrive on attention, they work best when everything possible is in them.
Since converting to AF, my dashboard has shrunk smaller than ever, and I'm very happy about it! With no C2 to hold me back, I can fly through the notebook any time by "getting the folder out" once per page, dynamically building a hot-list on the last page. However, I am still finding core items that I want available at a glance, so the tedium of nightly dashboard editing still feels like a necessary evil.
For quite some time, I've been tempted to start a second notebook (small, handy, portable) containing only the urgent items, left always open to the current page—an AF just for Urgent. This sounds like it would solve much of the problem. The only reason I haven't acted on it yet is that I wanted to experience plain old AF for a while before driving myself any crazier with tweaks. I figure my dashboard is not a tweak, because it contains only items that are officially not recommended for AF.
<< Bernie: to stop that swivellng, have you thought of reformatting your dashboard to be a page in your notebook? >>
I print the dashboard nightly from my computer, so no, I would not want to convert it to a notebook page at this point (which I presume would be hand-written into the notebook).
The dashboard has some detailed components that rarely change, such as daily checklists and a small six-week calendar, and a running list of errands. Those things work nicely on a dashboard, because they don't need updating every night, and they are the wrong sorts of things to put on a task list.
The part that doesn't work, and would be wonderful to move into the notebook, are the must-do items, especially the ones that are due 2-3 days from now. In AF/SF, those items threaten to turn the notebook into a treadmill, where one has to maintain a minimum page-turn rate to know that nothing critical has been overlooked. Moving those items out of the notebook makes it easier for me to scan them, at the cost of diverting attention from the notebook. Since these notebook systems thrive on attention, they work best when everything possible is in them.
Since converting to AF, my dashboard has shrunk smaller than ever, and I'm very happy about it! With no C2 to hold me back, I can fly through the notebook any time by "getting the folder out" once per page, dynamically building a hot-list on the last page. However, I am still finding core items that I want available at a glance, so the tedium of nightly dashboard editing still feels like a necessary evil.
For quite some time, I've been tempted to start a second notebook (small, handy, portable) containing only the urgent items, left always open to the current page—an AF just for Urgent. This sounds like it would solve much of the problem. The only reason I haven't acted on it yet is that I wanted to experience plain old AF for a while before driving myself any crazier with tweaks. I figure my dashboard is not a tweak, because it contains only items that are officially not recommended for AF.
August 27, 2011 at 22:59 |
Bernie
Bernie
Bernie:
My new system obviates the need for everything on your dashboard except the calendar. So when I publish it in three months' time you will at last be spared those nightly sessions!
My new system obviates the need for everything on your dashboard except the calendar. So when I publish it in three months' time you will at last be spared those nightly sessions!
August 27, 2011 at 23:40 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
When I experiment with a new system, it generally doesn't take that long to evulate it. Problems usually come up fairly quickly and I'll just go back to AF1. In fact, I go through a series of predicable phases:
Phase 1: Setup: First, I go through the instructions to understand them and then I jump in with a set-up. For example, when I started Superfocus I just started a new continuous list that covered about 4 pages. This is a risky phase because I'm always afraid of missing some task due to error or omission in the transition.
Phase 2: Consolidation: I like to work through the system, kind of "get it going" enough to get a real feel for how it works. This varies in time. For AF1, for example, I wanted to have a few dismissals under my belt and few new pages added on so I could get the feel for it. With DMW this took a bit longer because I wanted the feel of running up against month old tasks for dismissal. But I want to really learn the system. This is where this forum is invaluable, because others are asking good questions about how they are implementing it. I generally won't drop a system in this phase, but if disaster strikes and I hate it, there's no point in me continuing it. That would, in fact, be counterproductive.
Phase 3: Evaluation: Once I'm comfortable with the system, I start to get a feel for how effective it is, how motivating it is and how complete it is. Any major red flags probably would have come up already, ( i.e a missed appointment or a missed deadline or a feeling of being overwhelmed.) If the system is working well, I'll just keep using it. If a new system comes along that looks like it might be an improvement, I'll try it, but I'll be measuring it against the best system I'm using so far. If it works, then I'll be using that until another system comes up to try. I'll know fairly quickly if the new system is better than the old one, hence what appears to be a rapid turnaround is just the death of a system that obviously fails for me. In fact, this helps clarify why the system I'm currently using works so well.
So far, by the way, I'm really liking this free-form notebook idea I've been using it for a week. Before that, my "default" system was simply AF1. Before that my best system was pure GTD with "Things," and I have occasionally gone back to that. I even went back to Franklin Covey once, but nothing so far has compared to AF1 for the sheer joy of getting things done. With the free-form notebook, I'm just entering the evaluation phase, and so far it's the best for me as an overall system, and it just includes AF1.
Phase 1: Setup: First, I go through the instructions to understand them and then I jump in with a set-up. For example, when I started Superfocus I just started a new continuous list that covered about 4 pages. This is a risky phase because I'm always afraid of missing some task due to error or omission in the transition.
Phase 2: Consolidation: I like to work through the system, kind of "get it going" enough to get a real feel for how it works. This varies in time. For AF1, for example, I wanted to have a few dismissals under my belt and few new pages added on so I could get the feel for it. With DMW this took a bit longer because I wanted the feel of running up against month old tasks for dismissal. But I want to really learn the system. This is where this forum is invaluable, because others are asking good questions about how they are implementing it. I generally won't drop a system in this phase, but if disaster strikes and I hate it, there's no point in me continuing it. That would, in fact, be counterproductive.
Phase 3: Evaluation: Once I'm comfortable with the system, I start to get a feel for how effective it is, how motivating it is and how complete it is. Any major red flags probably would have come up already, ( i.e a missed appointment or a missed deadline or a feeling of being overwhelmed.) If the system is working well, I'll just keep using it. If a new system comes along that looks like it might be an improvement, I'll try it, but I'll be measuring it against the best system I'm using so far. If it works, then I'll be using that until another system comes up to try. I'll know fairly quickly if the new system is better than the old one, hence what appears to be a rapid turnaround is just the death of a system that obviously fails for me. In fact, this helps clarify why the system I'm currently using works so well.
So far, by the way, I'm really liking this free-form notebook idea I've been using it for a week. Before that, my "default" system was simply AF1. Before that my best system was pure GTD with "Things," and I have occasionally gone back to that. I even went back to Franklin Covey once, but nothing so far has compared to AF1 for the sheer joy of getting things done. With the free-form notebook, I'm just entering the evaluation phase, and so far it's the best for me as an overall system, and it just includes AF1.
August 28, 2011 at 0:07 |
Paul MacNeil
Paul MacNeil
Mark wrote:
<< My new system obviates the need for everything on your dashboard except the calendar.>>
Yay!
<<So when I publish it in three months' time you will at last be spared those nightly sessions!>>
Um, muted yay! Then I'm counting backwards from 91, and ... Isn't this neat? On my calendar I'm entering "1-2-7" on 11-27.
Twenty-six days from now:
Q: What's better about today?
A: Mark Forster has only 65 days to go until unveiling 1-2-7 ...
Now to enter the following in Autofocus and see which stands out first:
- Take a nap for next 91 days
- Add to dashboard: streamline dashboard 1.1% per day for next 90 days
- Start thread about sharing systems tested ruggedly for three entire *weeks* and hope Mark replies
- Buy stock in Squarespace and Moleskine, hire a personal assistant, and move to a private island! On assistant's calendar, enter: 11-27: "1-2-7"
<< My new system obviates the need for everything on your dashboard except the calendar.>>
Yay!
<<So when I publish it in three months' time you will at last be spared those nightly sessions!>>
Um, muted yay! Then I'm counting backwards from 91, and ... Isn't this neat? On my calendar I'm entering "1-2-7" on 11-27.
Twenty-six days from now:
Q: What's better about today?
A: Mark Forster has only 65 days to go until unveiling 1-2-7 ...
Now to enter the following in Autofocus and see which stands out first:
- Take a nap for next 91 days
- Add to dashboard: streamline dashboard 1.1% per day for next 90 days
- Start thread about sharing systems tested ruggedly for three entire *weeks* and hope Mark replies
- Buy stock in Squarespace and Moleskine, hire a personal assistant, and move to a private island! On assistant's calendar, enter: 11-27: "1-2-7"
August 28, 2011 at 3:31 |
Bernie
Bernie
<<That sounds exciting. Are you willing to tell us how it works? >>
Let me take a week to experiment and then maybe I'll post how it works.
One concern I have is that the system was situational, so that it might not work in a non-pressured environment, but also I will definitely have to make some modifications because there wasn't any long-term planning, it was basically putting out fires constantly, which isn't to say that I wasn't making progress, I did an excellent job and there were clear tangible outcomes (in addition I was training people under me), but I need to incorporate this into the home system. If there was a long-term project at work that was really important, depending on how busy I was I would try to attend, but frequently had to excuse myself if critical or important tasks arose.
Let me take a week to experiment and then maybe I'll post how it works.
One concern I have is that the system was situational, so that it might not work in a non-pressured environment, but also I will definitely have to make some modifications because there wasn't any long-term planning, it was basically putting out fires constantly, which isn't to say that I wasn't making progress, I did an excellent job and there were clear tangible outcomes (in addition I was training people under me), but I need to incorporate this into the home system. If there was a long-term project at work that was really important, depending on how busy I was I would try to attend, but frequently had to excuse myself if critical or important tasks arose.
August 28, 2011 at 14:39 |
Zeloc
Zeloc
Zeloc:
In a situation like that I've always found that prioritising by urgency alone is the best way.
In a situation like that I've always found that prioritising by urgency alone is the best way.
August 28, 2011 at 14:47 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
I did not prioritize by urgency alone as there were a lot of relatively unimportant urgent tasks and some very important tasks, so it was going back and forth between these so as not to fall behind on a steadily increasing task list. Also delegate anything that should be delegated, and as early as possible in the day, keep track of all tasks that you are waiting for others on as if they are tasks for you to complete. There was grouping together of related tasks as well.
August 28, 2011 at 22:54 |
Zeloc
Zeloc
I wrote: "Yet that 95% still feels achievable."
I think I've got it! We'll see after 19 days. Extremely simple, focused on finishing, responsive to urgent tasks, and reliably tackles the old tasks.
I think I've got it! We'll see after 19 days. Extremely simple, focused on finishing, responsive to urgent tasks, and reliably tackles the old tasks.
August 29, 2011 at 1:35 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
7 consecutive good days and one mediocre in a suddenly high-pressure environment. Not bad. Reviewed everything on the table, see no fundamental flaw.
Slight adjustment, mental reset, and let's see if I can't double that streak.
Slight adjustment, mental reset, and let's see if I can't double that streak.
September 9, 2011 at 2:30 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
@Alan,
"Now a new idea arises that attempts to combine the best of SF, My System, the random notebook, DIT, ideas from Dreams. How can I say no?"
Okay, you have piqued my interest. May be you can share your methodology?
GC
"Now a new idea arises that attempts to combine the best of SF, My System, the random notebook, DIT, ideas from Dreams. How can I say no?"
Okay, you have piqued my interest. May be you can share your methodology?
GC
September 9, 2011 at 3:53 |
Greenchutney
Greenchutney
Not yet. It was only a new idea, not a working methodology. Aug 29 changed the idea. The next post claims semisuccess and a smaller change. But even that isn't yet a system. The core is stable but the mechanics aren't.
September 9, 2011 at 5:23 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Alan:
<< The core is stable but the mechanics aren't. >>
Sounds familiar!
<< The core is stable but the mechanics aren't. >>
Sounds familiar!
September 9, 2011 at 9:49 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
<< The core is stable but the mechanics aren't. >>
<Sounds familiar!>
Sounds like a promising idea.... have a *simple* core system and then 'bolt ons' to suit different circumstances.
Has the advantage that if your circumstances change, you don't need to start over with a completely different system.
<Sounds familiar!>
Sounds like a promising idea.... have a *simple* core system and then 'bolt ons' to suit different circumstances.
Has the advantage that if your circumstances change, you don't need to start over with a completely different system.
September 9, 2011 at 12:16 |
smileypete
smileypete
I'm a presently running two distinct versions of the system, and both are running well. The distinction is necessary because of different requirements between home and work, and because digital media differs from paper in what's efficient. Both seem to be working quite well, and congealing into something fast and easy.
I'm calling this Hot New Pages as a mnemonic that keeps me going straight.
I'm calling this Hot New Pages as a mnemonic that keeps me going straight.
September 13, 2011 at 22:58 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Click! :-)
September 15, 2011 at 16:35 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Eureka? :-)
September 16, 2011 at 11:27 |
smileypete
smileypete
Yes.
September 16, 2011 at 23:42 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Care to share it now? We will absolutely understand if many things are in flux and is not set in stone.. :)
September 17, 2011 at 0:00 |
Greenchutney
Greenchutney
Indeed, spill the beans please Alan! :-)
September 18, 2011 at 11:52 |
smileypete
smileypete
+JMJ+
Hahaha, so here's the system you were alluding to, Alan.
OK, let's see when you're ready, I'll publish mine when you publish yours.
And I am willing to bet your system is much more simple than mine!
Godspeed on your system!
Hahaha, so here's the system you were alluding to, Alan.
OK, let's see when you're ready, I'll publish mine when you publish yours.
And I am willing to bet your system is much more simple than mine!
Godspeed on your system!
September 18, 2011 at 16:23 |
nuntym
nuntym
+JMJ+
The general idea for my current system can be found here: http://www.markforster.net/blog/2011/9/13/so-where-has-it-got-to-today.html#comment15042261
Anyways, here are some of the salient features of the system:
■ My system *automatically* makes a dashboard list of the most important items to do today according to what you have done the day before, and yet *automatically* prunes out (*without* dismissal) the unimportant stuff for the next day.
■ Because it *minimizes rewriting*, the system is fast and efficient. Also, it is the system most responsive to urgent matters that I have ever used...much more responsive than AF2, Ping Pong AF, or my previous system, CAF, even.
■ This system really focuses on finishing AND handling recurrent items while still effective at handling new and old stuff.
■ It easily handles prioritizing and re-prioritizing of tasks. An example scenario: initially on analysis, task 1 needs to be done before Task 2 and, Task 2 needs to be done before Task 3, therefore you mark them as such; and yet you realize later, after starting Task 1, you have to do Task 3 first before everything else, therefore you mark everything as such. This can be done quickly and effectively in the system.
■ In spite of these features, it is, in my experience, the system I have used that has the *least stress* on me to do something, and yet still gets the important things done. I think this is because the choosing of tasks is both very logical and very intuitive.
So can anyone blame me for thinking that my system could have similarities to Mark's new one? ^____^
God bless!
The general idea for my current system can be found here: http://www.markforster.net/blog/2011/9/13/so-where-has-it-got-to-today.html#comment15042261
Anyways, here are some of the salient features of the system:
■ My system *automatically* makes a dashboard list of the most important items to do today according to what you have done the day before, and yet *automatically* prunes out (*without* dismissal) the unimportant stuff for the next day.
■ Because it *minimizes rewriting*, the system is fast and efficient. Also, it is the system most responsive to urgent matters that I have ever used...much more responsive than AF2, Ping Pong AF, or my previous system, CAF, even.
■ This system really focuses on finishing AND handling recurrent items while still effective at handling new and old stuff.
■ It easily handles prioritizing and re-prioritizing of tasks. An example scenario: initially on analysis, task 1 needs to be done before Task 2 and, Task 2 needs to be done before Task 3, therefore you mark them as such; and yet you realize later, after starting Task 1, you have to do Task 3 first before everything else, therefore you mark everything as such. This can be done quickly and effectively in the system.
■ In spite of these features, it is, in my experience, the system I have used that has the *least stress* on me to do something, and yet still gets the important things done. I think this is because the choosing of tasks is both very logical and very intuitive.
So can anyone blame me for thinking that my system could have similarities to Mark's new one? ^____^
God bless!
September 18, 2011 at 21:31 |
nuntym
nuntym
@nuntym
-----
It easily handles prioritizing and re-prioritizing of tasks. An example scenario: initially on analysis, task 1 needs to be done before Task 2 and, Task 2 needs to be done before Task 3, therefore you mark them as such; and yet you realize later, after starting Task 1, you have to do Task 3 first before everything else, therefore you mark everything as such. This can be done quickly and effectively in the system.
-----
this is most intriguing, how do you do this? I mean, have a list and some numbers. do you cross out and renumber, or erase? those are both obvious, but it seems from your description that perhaps you have something new? nothing wrong with the obvious, just curious if something new!
-----
It easily handles prioritizing and re-prioritizing of tasks. An example scenario: initially on analysis, task 1 needs to be done before Task 2 and, Task 2 needs to be done before Task 3, therefore you mark them as such; and yet you realize later, after starting Task 1, you have to do Task 3 first before everything else, therefore you mark everything as such. This can be done quickly and effectively in the system.
-----
this is most intriguing, how do you do this? I mean, have a list and some numbers. do you cross out and renumber, or erase? those are both obvious, but it seems from your description that perhaps you have something new? nothing wrong with the obvious, just curious if something new!
September 19, 2011 at 3:49 |
matthewS
matthewS
I thank God He has allowed me the success I have. That 'click!' is merely my date marker for when my understanding shifted into what I think will achieve my longstanding goal for AF. The last few days have been wonderful, but it's too early to say whether it's just a combination of enthusiasm and good weather.
Nuntym wrote <<dashboard ...
*automatically* prunes
*minimizes rewriting*,
more responsive
finishing AND handling recurrent items
prioritizing and re-prioritizing
*least stress*
>>
wow! For my part, I'm only looking at more responsive and less stress. So maybe we had similar systems once but no longer.
I've been continuously evolving from SuperFocus to an easier system to achieve its goals better. The present state is clearly a simple and fast autofocus variant, not radical, but rebalanced. Yet I'm observing now that all the intricacies of effective self-management are handled well as tasks under the system instead of as rules.
At present I'm still adjusting my list to the new framework.
Nuntym wrote <<dashboard ...
*automatically* prunes
*minimizes rewriting*,
more responsive
finishing AND handling recurrent items
prioritizing and re-prioritizing
*least stress*
>>
wow! For my part, I'm only looking at more responsive and less stress. So maybe we had similar systems once but no longer.
I've been continuously evolving from SuperFocus to an easier system to achieve its goals better. The present state is clearly a simple and fast autofocus variant, not radical, but rebalanced. Yet I'm observing now that all the intricacies of effective self-management are handled well as tasks under the system instead of as rules.
At present I'm still adjusting my list to the new framework.
September 19, 2011 at 3:51 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
I also saw a post here that noted that a number of persons who were using the new version of Superfocus from February 2011 have stopped using it although it seems that there are several that continue to use it to good effect.
The author also experiments quite a bit and posts the results on this forum.
I have a suggestion, the purpose being to determine the best time management or productivity kind of system. Why don't all of us experiment with various ideas, but delay discussing the results unless we were able to maintain the habit for 3 months. I have done things for 3 weeks that did not persist, sometimes even a month. No one can argue with an idea that has worked for 3 months. It also takes quite a while for a new habit to be established, while the success literature erroneously states 3 weeks as being the amount of time, it actually takes much longer and there was a great paper published within the last few years that studied habit formation and concluded that the time needed was much longer.
If a number of persons are trying different things and keeping track of results, either individually or in a kind of a group page, then we will determine in a much shorter fashion what the optimal system is, and the forum won't be bombarded by examples of ideas that only lasted a week but was too soon to determine its true effectiveness.
I had a time when I was phenomenally productive at work by using a system which I am going to try to apply to home and see if I can get it to work. I looked at the rules for Superfocus but haven't yet read about AF or other ideas but will be receiving the Do It Tomorrow book and would also like to try this idea that worked very effectively professionally and see if I can modify it to work in my home situation where the tasks are a bit different.