Discussion Forum > Colley's Rule
I've had pretty good results using this method, but rather than resistance I ask Alan Lakein's question: "What is the best use of my time right now?". Results in a pretty good common-sense choice based on time, energy, context etc.
April 5, 2014 at 15:33 |
Simon
Simon
Simon:
So I am right in thinking that this means that you are seeking to identify the first task after the benchmark that is a better use of your time right now than the benchmark?
Yes, I can see how that would work. I think I'll give it a try.
So I am right in thinking that this means that you are seeking to identify the first task after the benchmark that is a better use of your time right now than the benchmark?
Yes, I can see how that would work. I think I'll give it a try.
April 5, 2014 at 20:33 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
I'm trying both of the above today:
1. "What's the first thing more urgent than the benchmark?"
2. "What's the first better use of my time now than the benchmark?"
1. "What's the first thing more urgent than the benchmark?"
2. "What's the first better use of my time now than the benchmark?"
April 6, 2014 at 0:39 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
Lakein's question is good, just wondering if it imposes too many choices in the moment? (maybe it doesn't). 'Most urgent' on the other hand may stand out more clearly, assuming the item is important enough to be done at all.
This criteria also frees the mind up to deal with the niggling urgent items prior to freeing up some psychological space to address the benchmark item. Which is a good thing if we assume the earlier items on the list may be more likely to be important and relatively less urgent.
I personally tend to struggle with list 'analysis paralysis' so may find the 'urgency' criteria more effective for my needs.
This criteria also frees the mind up to deal with the niggling urgent items prior to freeing up some psychological space to address the benchmark item. Which is a good thing if we assume the earlier items on the list may be more likely to be important and relatively less urgent.
I personally tend to struggle with list 'analysis paralysis' so may find the 'urgency' criteria more effective for my needs.
April 6, 2014 at 10:28 |
Leon
Leon
Leon:
<< Lakein's question is good, just wondering if it imposes too many choices in the moment? >>
Yes, that's the conclusion I came to after trying it out yesterday. There are just too many factors to take into account. Urgency on the other hand is a straight choice "is x more urgent than y?"
What I'm trying to establish now is whether urgency or resistance is the better criterion. They both work well but I do notice that the tasks I classify as "more urgent than y" have a tendency to be the easy quick ones.
<< Lakein's question is good, just wondering if it imposes too many choices in the moment? >>
Yes, that's the conclusion I came to after trying it out yesterday. There are just too many factors to take into account. Urgency on the other hand is a straight choice "is x more urgent than y?"
What I'm trying to establish now is whether urgency or resistance is the better criterion. They both work well but I do notice that the tasks I classify as "more urgent than y" have a tendency to be the easy quick ones.
April 6, 2014 at 12:14 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
I start with the first task on the list as a benchmark. Then compare it to the second task and, to be specific, ask a slightly modified version of Lakein's question -- "Which of these tasks is a better use of my time right now?". If the second task is better, it becomes the new benchmark, and then you work down the list this way. It's pretty quick, and actually a lot of the time the answer is obvious.
Another variation I tried was paired comparisons. If I had 8 tasks on my list, I would do a little "playoff" -- task 1 vs task 8, task 2 vs task 7, task 3 vs task 6, task 4 vs task 5, and resolve the winner using Lakein's question. The winners would move to the second round (eg task 1 vs task 7, task 3 vs task 5), those winners would move to a third round (eg task 7 vs task 5) and then the winner of that round (eg task 5) would be the task I did next. With 4 "games" in the first round, 2 in the second and 1 in the third, it only takes 7 "decisions" to declare a winner among the 8 tasks. There is also something about the paired comparison approach that makes it easy to choose between two items.
The problem though is that the number of tasks has to be a power of 2 (eg 4, 8, 16, 32), although you can get around that with "byes" to the second round. Still, I found with 20-30 tasks this approach was a bit too slow, and it was quicker to just start with a benchmark task and use Colley's rule.
Another variation I tried was paired comparisons. If I had 8 tasks on my list, I would do a little "playoff" -- task 1 vs task 8, task 2 vs task 7, task 3 vs task 6, task 4 vs task 5, and resolve the winner using Lakein's question. The winners would move to the second round (eg task 1 vs task 7, task 3 vs task 5), those winners would move to a third round (eg task 7 vs task 5) and then the winner of that round (eg task 5) would be the task I did next. With 4 "games" in the first round, 2 in the second and 1 in the third, it only takes 7 "decisions" to declare a winner among the 8 tasks. There is also something about the paired comparison approach that makes it easy to choose between two items.
The problem though is that the number of tasks has to be a power of 2 (eg 4, 8, 16, 32), although you can get around that with "byes" to the second round. Still, I found with 20-30 tasks this approach was a bit too slow, and it was quicker to just start with a benchmark task and use Colley's rule.
April 6, 2014 at 17:06 |
Simon
Simon
Hmm, actually you could probably just always keep a focus group of 8 tasks on hand, and then do the paired comparisons on that group. Once a task is completed you would fill in the vacated slot on the "Focus 8" list with another task from your main (longer) to do list.
April 6, 2014 at 17:12 |
Simon
Simon
"Better use of my time right now" raises my resistance. Additionally, scanning of the list is slow. "More urgent than y" lowers my resistance and a scan is quick. However, as Mark has found, the easy quick ones stand out.
April 6, 2014 at 19:18 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
Maybe you could just use the question: "What's better?"
April 8, 2014 at 20:20 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Seraphim:
It would need to be "Which is better?"
It would need to be "Which is better?"
April 8, 2014 at 21:37 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Leon, you said, "...if we assume the earlier items on the list may be more likely to be important and relatively less urgent."
That's how I feel much of the time. Things got old because they're not urgent, but they're often important in the long-term. They're often things that will benefit you more if done sooner, but it's never too late to do them, so no deadline.
One-Minute To Do List settled on urgency for the same reasons. It's less-subjective. However, urgency doesn't work for projects without deadlines.
Currently, I'm using a focus list for the week (about 20 items), generating a random number (1-10), counting from the top, and using that item as my benchmark.
My question varies. The day begins with "If I can only do one thing today, which is better?" Then I move to "Which will bother me more if I keep putting it off indefinitely?" I have several tasks which keep sliding until I look back and wonder why I didn't get anything done.
Sometimes, the question is, "Why the H... do I keep putting this off?" That's not exactly a comparison question, but often gets me moving!
That's how I feel much of the time. Things got old because they're not urgent, but they're often important in the long-term. They're often things that will benefit you more if done sooner, but it's never too late to do them, so no deadline.
One-Minute To Do List settled on urgency for the same reasons. It's less-subjective. However, urgency doesn't work for projects without deadlines.
Currently, I'm using a focus list for the week (about 20 items), generating a random number (1-10), counting from the top, and using that item as my benchmark.
My question varies. The day begins with "If I can only do one thing today, which is better?" Then I move to "Which will bother me more if I keep putting it off indefinitely?" I have several tasks which keep sliding until I look back and wonder why I didn't get anything done.
Sometimes, the question is, "Why the H... do I keep putting this off?" That's not exactly a comparison question, but often gets me moving!
April 10, 2014 at 15:23 |
Cricket
Cricket
Cricket:
<< However, urgency doesn't work for projects without deadlines.>>
Is there actually such a thing as a project without deadline?
I remember a secretary who was working for several executives was having a problem prioritizing her work because she didn't know how urgent the stuff the executives gave her to work on was.
So I suggested to the executives that whenever they gave her a piece of work they should say when they wanted it done by. One of the executives said "But a lot of my work I don't mind when it's done by".
Me: "Would you be happy if it hadn't been done in a year's time?"
Exec: "No!"
Me: "So you *do* mind when it's done by?"
<< However, urgency doesn't work for projects without deadlines.>>
Is there actually such a thing as a project without deadline?
I remember a secretary who was working for several executives was having a problem prioritizing her work because she didn't know how urgent the stuff the executives gave her to work on was.
So I suggested to the executives that whenever they gave her a piece of work they should say when they wanted it done by. One of the executives said "But a lot of my work I don't mind when it's done by".
Me: "Would you be happy if it hadn't been done in a year's time?"
Exec: "No!"
Me: "So you *do* mind when it's done by?"
April 11, 2014 at 19:00 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
<<Is there actually such a thing as a project without deadline?>>
I recall reading your advice to DIT-users that we start handling projects with deadlines as soon as they come in, whereas we should handle projects without deadlines one at a time. I am using DIT, and I have a list called "Projects Without Deadlines," which I feed one at a time into the task diary rather than all at once, per your recommendations. One of these projects is to "minimalize" a lot of things in my apartment - my closet, filing cabinet, laptop case, desk, etc. Yes, I would rather get it done this month than next year, but it doesn't have a deadline in the ordinary sense, as my papers for school do. If I added everything I wanted to do to my task diary - including all projects without specific deadlines at once - I'd be overloaded. I'm already almost overloaded, though DIT is slowly but surely changing that.
I recall reading your advice to DIT-users that we start handling projects with deadlines as soon as they come in, whereas we should handle projects without deadlines one at a time. I am using DIT, and I have a list called "Projects Without Deadlines," which I feed one at a time into the task diary rather than all at once, per your recommendations. One of these projects is to "minimalize" a lot of things in my apartment - my closet, filing cabinet, laptop case, desk, etc. Yes, I would rather get it done this month than next year, but it doesn't have a deadline in the ordinary sense, as my papers for school do. If I added everything I wanted to do to my task diary - including all projects without specific deadlines at once - I'd be overloaded. I'm already almost overloaded, though DIT is slowly but surely changing that.
April 12, 2014 at 18:58 |
Austin
Austin
Austin:
<< I recall reading your advice to DIT-users that we start handling projects with deadlines as soon as they come in, whereas we should handle projects without deadlines one at a time.>>
The original idea was that one should put the non-deadline projects on a list and arrange them in the order in which you intend to do them. This makes you identify the relative priority of each project and effectively gives each one a deadline.
<< I am using DIT, and I have a list called "Projects Without Deadlines," which I feed one at a time into the task diary rather than all at once, per your recommendations. One of these projects is to "minimalize" a lot of things in my apartment - my closet, filing cabinet, laptop case, desk, etc. Yes, I would rather get it done this month than next year, but it doesn't have a deadline in the ordinary sense, as my papers for school do. >>
What from what you've said, you have given it a deadline in your mind of one month.
<< If I added everything I wanted to do to my task diary - including all projects without specific deadlines at once - I'd be overloaded. >>
You don't do them all at once. Instead you work out the order in which you want to do them. That forces you to decide the relative priority of each project. This can then be expressed as a deadline. For instance you decide Project C (half a week's work) should be done after Project A (1 week) and Project B (2 weeks), you have just given Project C a deadline of 3.5 weeks.
<< I recall reading your advice to DIT-users that we start handling projects with deadlines as soon as they come in, whereas we should handle projects without deadlines one at a time.>>
The original idea was that one should put the non-deadline projects on a list and arrange them in the order in which you intend to do them. This makes you identify the relative priority of each project and effectively gives each one a deadline.
<< I am using DIT, and I have a list called "Projects Without Deadlines," which I feed one at a time into the task diary rather than all at once, per your recommendations. One of these projects is to "minimalize" a lot of things in my apartment - my closet, filing cabinet, laptop case, desk, etc. Yes, I would rather get it done this month than next year, but it doesn't have a deadline in the ordinary sense, as my papers for school do. >>
What from what you've said, you have given it a deadline in your mind of one month.
<< If I added everything I wanted to do to my task diary - including all projects without specific deadlines at once - I'd be overloaded. >>
You don't do them all at once. Instead you work out the order in which you want to do them. That forces you to decide the relative priority of each project. This can then be expressed as a deadline. For instance you decide Project C (half a week's work) should be done after Project A (1 week) and Project B (2 weeks), you have just given Project C a deadline of 3.5 weeks.
April 12, 2014 at 23:09 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
That makes a lot of sense. Thanks.
April 13, 2014 at 0:18 |
Austin
Austin
To my mind, there are two similar but different concepts at work here.
One is "this must really be done by that date/time (or else...)". This is what I call a deadline, and these are in general externally imposed.
The other is "I'd like to have this out of the way by this date/time (but there is not realy an immediate consequence if I don't)". This I call a target date. These can be self-imposed or external. The often heard suggestion to add an artificial "deadline" to a task in order to force yourself to progress on it falls under this category as well.
The way my psychology works, a real (external) deadline can get me moving. Most of the time I meet them, often well in advance as I don't like last minute stress. However, a target date cannot motivate me, as I know very well that these may be desirable but are still artificial, and I cannot fool myself into believing that they have the same weight (more specifically, consequences) as a real "deadline".
To summarise, I do set target dates, but unlike deadlines, I often fail to meet them, and this can be a source of frustration and dissatisfaction.
One is "this must really be done by that date/time (or else...)". This is what I call a deadline, and these are in general externally imposed.
The other is "I'd like to have this out of the way by this date/time (but there is not realy an immediate consequence if I don't)". This I call a target date. These can be self-imposed or external. The often heard suggestion to add an artificial "deadline" to a task in order to force yourself to progress on it falls under this category as well.
The way my psychology works, a real (external) deadline can get me moving. Most of the time I meet them, often well in advance as I don't like last minute stress. However, a target date cannot motivate me, as I know very well that these may be desirable but are still artificial, and I cannot fool myself into believing that they have the same weight (more specifically, consequences) as a real "deadline".
To summarise, I do set target dates, but unlike deadlines, I often fail to meet them, and this can be a source of frustration and dissatisfaction.
April 14, 2014 at 7:54 |
Marc (from Brussels)
Marc (from Brussels)
Marc (from Brussels)
<< I do set target dates, but unlike deadlines, I often fail to meet them, and this can be a source of frustration and dissatisfaction. >>
In this discussion we're talking about the relative priority of projects when using a simple question like "Is A more urgent than B?"
I agree with you that internally imposed target dates tend to be far less motivating than externally imposed deadlines (though they are more motivating than not having a target date at all). However that is not really what is at issue here. We are only looking at it from the point of view of answering the above question.
<< I do set target dates, but unlike deadlines, I often fail to meet them, and this can be a source of frustration and dissatisfaction. >>
In this discussion we're talking about the relative priority of projects when using a simple question like "Is A more urgent than B?"
I agree with you that internally imposed target dates tend to be far less motivating than externally imposed deadlines (though they are more motivating than not having a target date at all). However that is not really what is at issue here. We are only looking at it from the point of view of answering the above question.
April 14, 2014 at 17:35 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
My current big project is hitting roadblocks from outside. Next year's president doesn't want to look at the preliminary schedule info until all her own major projects are done -- by which time I'll have 3 weeks to arrange 20 teachers, do the schedule, get descriptions and pictures, and get the newsletter out. Most teachers like a few weeks to think about the project before committing, but no one who hasn't done the job before believes we need to start before April.
I'm doing it to my schedule, and if the VP asks for a change that can't be done, tough.
I'm doing it to my schedule, and if the VP asks for a change that can't be done, tough.
April 21, 2014 at 16:48 |
Cricket
Cricket
I've been experimenting with using this method, but instead of using resistance I use urgency as the criterion. So I do the first task that is more urgent than the benchmark, whatever it is.
So far (one day), this is working very well.
Although I originally said the method using resistance worked best with a closed list, I'm using this with an open list and it doesn't seem to be a problem.