Get Everything Done

Inspired by Mark`s spinning plates method (http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2014/3/30/the-spinning-plates-method-of-project-control-experimental.html) applied to my current thinking about rotating/changing methods/tricks (http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2320870) I was thinking that I was not able to differentiate about "incremental" value of different methods/tricks, because I have been using them so long that I do not know the difference between using them and not using them.

I decided to try "start from zero" experiment. For several days starting from now, I will not use any TM method/trick. I will use only calendar (where are a.o. my business appointments and critical deadlines). No lists, no daily task list etc. No tricks for choosing tasks (FV, randomness). And I want to see the difference: what difference will it be in terms of my things done? What in psychological terms of stress etc?

Gradually, after several days I might try *ONE* easy method/trick and see the difference (I do not have planned it, I will act intuitively). Than I may stop using it and try another one. Then maybe two methods together (and viewing difference again). The difference between this experiment and usual tweaking is that I will not try new methods. Only those tricks and approaches which I have been using already. I hope I will see the value of them. And maybe I will be surprised...

Mark, you are right. I am open to stay as long as I see effects. I will see. If effects are scary in a few days and my productivity drops, I will of course go back immediately (choosing something what works). If not, I may stay for longer period.

Avrum, thanks for your comment. Good points. Some more clarifications about my experiment: what I expect is not "quantified" measure, so that I could tell you about how many percent my productivity rose/fell. "Measure/quantify" approaches have never worked well for me in this area. I agree with you that there are so many factors behind our productivity that we cannot discover all of them (not even their synergy or antagonism). I just want this: experience (by changing my "environment"=no lists/no methods and gradually adding some).

WHY?

We are bombarded by endless advice about TM systems, productivity tips etc. Sometimes I ask: to what degree does productivity industry start to be artificial/self-perpetuating/solving problems which it has created by its own?

I want to experience "zero" state (in fact, not zero at all, because I will still use my habits, my motivation etc. but just not using lists and methods for working with lists of tasks). And to see what happens. Just to see it and act accordingly. Maybe I will be soon so stressed out that I will add one of my well-proved productivity methods/maybe I will try one productivity method with one easy list and let`s see what happen again... **I would like to obtain the least complicated degree of my productivity system which will still suffice for my work.** (plus to see if different methods have different "feel", strengths or suitability for particular context)

(To filter out other factors, I will definitely have to use it for some time.)

If - for example - I will see, that there is not so big difference between not having any list at all and having grandiose system of lists including list of lists to organize it (which I do not expect, but I am open to any experience), I will reconsider whether to use these elaborated productivity systems.

EXAMPLE: RUNNING AS A HOBBY OR OBSESSION?

Many people around me have recently started a new hobby: running. They read a lot of magazines about running, buy the best outfit, analyze their running styles on forums. They are tracking mileage. They measure heart beat. They have long discussions about all these issues.

But I ask to myself - did they try just for some time to take any shoes on and any pair of shorts and to just go to enjoy running? Is not their "research and discussing and trying all these new best running things and widgets" just obsession which in fact prevents them from enjoying running? **Do they enjoy it even more than running itself?**

I do not know what I can expect - I will see...

Already after day 1 many results which I have not expected:

- I tend to do tasks (which I have to do anyway) as they come without delay. Fear of forgetting them helps me to start - which I consider very positive. No adding to list = no delaying = no resistance later
- Very soon I started to ask automatically: What is most important now? Which surprised me. I did not ask this question before very often during the day because I felt I had everything important written in my today list.
- I use some methods (timeboxing, setting limits on activities) automatically, without thinking about them. I realise I am doing them in the middle of the task... which of course I will not fight against.

As for productivity, I have not felt any decline/improvement. Maybe clearer head (which I did not expect at all).

I do not think it will be permanent and I can relate to Mark`s experience above. But very interesting for just one day of experimenting.

After 3 days, I am leaving level 0 and starting easy list (to continue with my experiment). My experience so far:

(+)
I have realized how much adding something to list is a way how to postpone/delay unpleasant task. Without list I had to do it immediately (so as not to forget it) and it was very SIMILAR TO RANDOMNESS effect (little resistance, you just have to do this task, no choosing, no commenting)

I would like to find out how to differentiate more between what to add to list and what to do now (2minutes rule is too limited for me).

(0)
For some type reacting work (where you react to other people`s demands, emails) lists are not so necessary (you have lists anyway as email lists, unanswered calls list etc). However, for creative work which you define on your own, they are (important is more than momentary impulse).

(-)
- I lost overview. Concerns about: is this really most important now? Is not something most important (what I cannot recall, of course)? What is on my plate? Etc.
- I was not prepared. (for contexts where I could do only some tasks and I needed to prepare for them before)
- I missed some deadlines.

To sum it up. What I learnt about value of lists:

(+) Thanks to them:
- I can remember,
- I am sure about priorities,
- I have overview,
- I can prepare for later.

(-)
- I can delay unpleasant tasks (and grow resistance to them further)
- I can play with them (instead of work)
- I can prefer list activities which are more pleasant/less important than non-list work which should be done immediately (and I tend to delay this non-list work by first writing it down to inbox, later processing inbox...great time for avoiding it)

(0)
- I am LESS thinking about importance WHEN USING LISTS (surprising, maybe I psychologically trust lists and I do not have to think about it again - which can be both positive and negative)
- Even not-using-any-lists method can be prone to "new method effect" (=better productivity or at least such feeling for some time). I could maybe achieve such increase by changing methods regularly (which was my original idea leading to this experiment) + maybe using other ways for increasing awareness (meditation etc), because I feel that increase of awareness/novelty/decrease of habituation is connected to such effects.

I will continue with building some easy sort of list (I do not know how yet, I will build it gradually how the road will tell me...)

Daneb:

While searching old threads, I came across a post in which someone described doing something very similar to what you are doing. I was going to share it here for your benefit and then realized...the person was you, Daneb. Here is the thread: http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/1913954

I am intrigued both by this old post of yours and by your current experiment. What would you say is different about what you did then and what you are doing now?

Hi Austin,
thank you very much, I almost forgot I did it! :-) The main difference is that (1) this time I started without any lists and I wanted to see the function of them (=why I need to use them at all), (2) I do not want to try new methods - just to test again the proved ones to see how they work together or separately. The goal of the experiment would be to experience the "nuances" of these methods and possibly later to construct something what I describe here (http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2320870)

What I did before, was more "free" experiment (based on solution-focused approach, known from psychotherapy: test anything and commit to what works, leave what does not).

I was quite satisfied with the results but in the course of time, my approach started to be complicated I wanted to simplify. I felt that it could be better and more effective so I experimented further. What I still use and did not change (1) "modularity" = I do not feel obliged to use only one application/approach for my TM system. Sometimes I start to work with mindmap, later I copy it to outline in text processor, sometimes I use paper, sometimes just sticky note for quick list etc. (2) What was most important, I chose/tested some methods which I still use and combine together (based on time-boxing, Mark`s GED book, FV, easy prioritization etc.) - in fact majority of them are methods which I want to experiment with now (+ new ones as randomness, Colley`s rule)

Sounds good. How's it coming along now?

Austin: I am still experimenting. That will definitely need more time. Mainly now, I try to recognise different aspects of situations/my moods and to have "feeling" for choosing the right method = knowing when to use randomness, when to use priority-based tasks etc.

What has seemed to be clear so far as for methods for choosing tasks:
- randomness is perfect when I meet inner resistance to do anything (=laziness, days when I would like to lie all the day in bed...)
- tasks ordered by priority(importance) are most effective = when I have good, "productive" mood
- rotating 2 alternating tasks (pleasant and unpleasant) = when I have one particular task towards which I feel resistance...

etc. But no definite conclusion yet...

Hey Daneb,

When you get a chance and if you feel like it, I'd love to hear an update on this.

Austin,
thanks for your interest. I cannot give you very structured output of my experiment at the moment. What I do now is that I intuitively change between various approaches: sometimes I use one after another, sometimes more of them at once (e.g. (1) doing tasks by importance + (2) alternating the current important and demanding task with easy tasks (for quick refresh and motivation) (what I described as "rotating 2 alternating tasks" in my comment above + (3) limiting the demanding task by timebox...all together

I know it sounds complicated but it is not in fact. (I do not have problem to change the methods and their combinations several times during the day etc.).

Methods I use (at this phase of my experiment) and choose from are rather simple:

- daily planning (=choose several important tasks for today)
- doing tasks ordered by importance/resistance/how demanding they are (from daily plan)
- randomness (I choose from my daily plan/or from broader task list)
- 2 alternating tasks (see above comment)
- what I call "row" (=writing down short sequence of tasks - from daily plan+what seems important now - and doing them)
- timeboxes (=simply limiting time spent on current tasks, no complicated systems, I usually define timebox as 15-20 min (10min with tempting tasks), then break, then decision if to do other task or continue with the same task for next timebox)

How I choose from these methods: intuitively. Ideas I wrote in my comment above (randomness is best for high resistance etc.) are still valid however I feel that I choose methods for more reasons than I can just technically describe. What I notice is, that I need whole EXPERIENCE with each method so that I can choose it intuitively.

It reminds me of difference between declarative and procedural knowledge: We can give explicit, understandable description of how to add two numbers together (declarative knowledge), but we cannot technically describe how to keep balance on a bike (procedural knowledge which you can gain only by your own experience and learning).

With choosing TM methods, I feel that I stay somewhere in between procedural and declarative knowledge. I became sceptical that I would be able to precisely describe for which situation is which method best suited (which I thought would be the output of my experiment when I had started it...)

So maybe this will be my way: I will be able to efficiently choose from the methods and their combinations and alternating them but I will not be able to describe WHY exactly I choose such combination for such tasks/moods/projects...

/we will see/

Thanks Daneb. Very interesting thoughts and experiment.

I once tried a "hard reset" where I just stopped using any time management technique and it was an unmitigated disaster. I think it has to do with David Allen's ideas about getting stuff out of my head and into a trusted system. My brain is just not good at remembering details, so I had quite a few double booked and missed appointments. No only that, but gradually I felt it on an emotional level - a kind of nagging depressing out of control feeling.
The same thing happens when I periodically switch to pure GTD with Things or Omnifocus. I just love the platforms and I convince myself that I can organize my stuff by context. I can't - I end up returning to some version of AF1 because I'm missing stuff and I find myself dealing with the fallout for several months.
This leads me to the conclusion, or at least the opinion, that there is actually something objectively beneficial about Mark's systems.

PS sorry about the double post on the other thread.

FINAL ACCOUNT:

After several weeks, I would like to give final account of my experiment. I got very positive results. My system is now stable (I have not changed anything for weeks), so I am quite sure I will use it (at least for a while...). At the moment, I am very satisfied with it.

---Main points---

1. I choose methods intuitively, based on my experience with each of them. I do not plan what method to use today or in this moment. I somehow "know" what will work best - it is "standing out" approach, applied not to tasks, but to methods.

2. I hugely benefit from daily schedule. I have never appreciated before, how much it reduces clutter and saves mental energy. I have defined repeated activities which I do every day + approximate time when to do them (morning routines: yoga, jogging, important emails), afternoon routines (short spinal exercise, cold shower for energy boost...), evening routines etc. Many tasks which would be on my "daily plan", went to daily schedule. I try to give each task, which was repeated daily before, appropriate slot (in morning, afternoon or evening block of routines...)

3. Daily plan - I use every day. Choosing several important tasks for the day. Not too much - if I will finish them (rarely), I can add other to the list. I cluster the tasks into several groups - intuitively and every day differently, based on how I feel it - sometimes by context, sometimes by day time which I will do them, sometimes important together and small tasks together, sometimes only intuitivelly... sometimes based on more criteria...

---Methods ---

(I described them in more detail in my above comments):

- Schwabb rule / Eat the frog rule: from most important/urgent/resistant to less

- 2 alternating tasks

- row

- timeboxes

- A(b)C (which I described here in somehow complicated way http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2157240 - It is basically SMEMA with only 2 tasks: You define two tasks and do the first. Before doing the second one, you define new "second one", which you will do afterwards. In between tasks, you can do several small and brief unplanned activities.

- "ONLY..." (5 movements, 2 minutes, Next physical step...) - I focus only on such small steps. Very soon, I am in the middle of boring/demanding tasks.

- randomness (especially when fighting with big resistance) - I use it very rarely now, because I found out that my system itself (with many intuitive, "stand-out", mood-based choices) decreased a lot of my resistance. I will see if I will use randomness in the future at all. But at the moment, it stays in the arsenal.

+ of course, I use calendar for appointments (and I am also fan of "appointments with myself") and simple task management system (Things for mac) where I put my tasks divided by areas (and I schedule some of them). I work mainly with "Daily Plan" tasks during the day (which I define in the morning), but occasionally I add new tasks to my Daily Plan during the day, or from Things tasklists.

Follow-up (so as to be status of this experiment updated):

I use still the system above. I also use one additional method, based on Mark`s book Get Everything Done - rotating several tasks for predefined time (e.g. 10 minutes for each task), sometimes from shorter (5min) to longer periods as I cycle through them repeatedly, as Mark suggests.

+ I use randomness very rarely now - in fact, I have not been used it for quite a some time. But I would definitely choose it when dealing with resistant tasks.

That is all what is new. I have been using this system for more than half an year - the longest time I use one approach so far.

Of course, this approach is highly individual, however what I would recommend other readers to experiment with is: applying "standing-out" (intuitive) principle not only to tasks, but also to methods/approaches to deal with tasks. The VARIETY OF METHODS I can use is very refreshing for me and in my opinion it is reason why I use my system for so long time.

I've said it before, but I found this experiment fascinating and it has helped shape my thinking in my approach to productivity. I appreciate you sharing it with us.