To Think About . . .

It’s not whether you win or lose, it’s how you place the blame. Oscar Wilde

 

 

 

My Latest Book

Product Details

Also available on Amazon.com, Amazon.fr, and other Amazons and bookshops worldwide! 

Search This Site
Log-in
Latest Comments
My Other Books

Product Details

Product Details

Product Details

The Pathway to Awesomeness

Click to order other recommended books.

Find Us on Facebook Badge

Discussion Forum > Why does such a simple method work so well?

Hi all!

I think I've tried (to some extent) most of the time management methods on this forum. I've had decent success with them, some more than others. Yet I recently went through a disruption in my life and set aside following a system. Upon getting my feet planted on the ground again, I began using the "Must - Could - Should" list. This was mainly just so I could have a central place to keep my priorities and work from. Thing is... it works great for me! So, of course I'm starting to wonder how it can be tweaked into a working system and not just merely a priority 'catch-all' list. Any ideas?
September 17, 2014 at 4:05 | Unregistered CommenterMarco
Marco:

I read a book this summer called "Decide" by Steve McClatchy. The key idea that stood out for me is his prioritization method. He took the classic "ABC" prioritizing method, questioned its effectiveness, and changed it to:

A: Gain Tasks (Don't "Have-To")

B: Prevent Pain Tasks (Recorded "Have-To")

C: Prevent Pain Tasks ("Have-To")


So a list like:

Mow lawn for wife
Laundry
Tea
Email
Buy new phone
Breakfast for kids
Write 2 pages for screenplay
Zip lining?
Study russian
Pay Visa bill


Becomes:

A: Gain Tasks
Study russian
Write 2 pages for screenplay
Zip lining?
Tea

B: Prevent Pain (Recorded "Have-To")
Pay visa bill
Breakfast for kids
Mow lawn for wife

C: Prevent Pain ("Have-To")
Buy new phone
Laundry
Email
September 17, 2014 at 7:42 | Registered CommenterMichael B.
Gain Tasks (Results, Progress, Life Improvement, Connecting):
Gain tasks move your life in the direction you want it to go. Gain tasks improve your life and make it better. They prevent burnout, ruts and the feeling of being out of balance. They also give you the energy necessary to execute all the prevent pain tasks in less time.


Attributes of Gain Tasks:
• Never Urgent
• Don’t “Have-To” Do Them
• Produce Significant Results or Progress
• They Keep You Balanced
• You Can’t Delegate Them


Prevent Pain Tasks:
Prevent pain tasks only produce significant results when you *don’t* do them. They help you to maintain your life, not make your life better. They maintain the status quo. If neglected, they would eventually be brought to your attention by someone else.


Attributes of Prevent Pain Tasks:
• Eventually Become Urgent
• “Have-To” Do Them
• Keep You Where You Are
• They Can Burn You Out
• You Can Delegate Them


Two Priority Levels of Prevent Pain Tasks:
"B" tasks are recorded by other people
“C” tasks will be brought to your attention if you don’t do them, but no one is keeping a written record


So it's:

A: Gain
B: Prevent Pain (Recorded "Have-To")
C: Prevent Pain ("Have-To")

Or:

A: Improvement
B: Maintenance (Recorded)
C: Maintenance

Or:

A: Leading
B: Managing (Recorded)
C: Managing
September 17, 2014 at 8:28 | Registered CommenterMichael B.
Marco:

<< I began using the "Must - Could - Should" list. ... I'm starting to wonder how it can be tweaked into a working system and not just merely a priority 'catch-all' list. Any ideas? >>

I deal with the ABC system in my book "Get Everything Done and Still Have Time to Play", where I use it as an emergency system when suddenly faced with having to decide what needs doing in a limited amount of time.

What I say in the book is that the A, B and C should always be related to a time period, e.g.

A - What must I do [before the meeting] [today?] [this week]?
B - What should I do [before the meeting] [today?] [this week]?
C - What could I do [before the meeting] [today?] [this week]?

I do however warn against using it as a permanent system because there is a strong tendency to get no further than half-way down the B's. That means that the C's never get done.
September 17, 2014 at 8:59 | Registered CommenterMark Forster
michael:

<< A: Gain
B: Prevent Pain (Recorded "Have-To")
C: Prevent Pain ("Have-To") >>

As far as I can make out from just reading it, this more or less equates to doing the usual method of prioritizing in the order:

A. Could do
B. Must do
C. Should do

Try as hard as I can, I can't see how this could possibly work. If you study Russian and write two pages of your screenplay before giving your kids breakfast, then you are either having to get up extremely early or you have some very annoyed family members!
September 17, 2014 at 9:05 | Registered CommenterMark Forster
Mark:

From what I recall, he suggests doing at least one "A" task per day. The sentiment seemed to be that you really haven't made anything happen unless you have done an "A" task. You have instead only prevented things from happening if you complete all your "B" and "C" tasks. A lot of people rush around doing things to "prevent pain", and yet they are essentially standing in place as far as their life's progress is concerned if they neglect the "A" tasks.
September 17, 2014 at 9:27 | Registered CommenterMichael B.
FV basically covers everything from the Gain/Prevent Pain ABC method, and with lower overhead than the system described in the book.

At some point during the day with FV, one will likely have actioned multiple "gain tasks" that have reached the root position. And the "prevent pain tasks" will have been actioned in order of urgency.
September 17, 2014 at 10:56 | Registered CommenterMichael B.
Michael B.

<< From what I recall, he suggests doing at least one "A" task per day. >>

Ah, so it's not actually a prioritization method at all. Calling something Priority A implies that it will be done before lower priorities. Using the wrong terminology is misleading.
September 17, 2014 at 16:00 | Registered CommenterMark Forster
Yes. "Must - Should - Could" doesn't function in action as a priority list. For example, I am trying to select 1 item from each section for the day to take some action on. As my list grows I was thinking about selecting 1 "Must", 2 " Should", and 3 "Coulds"
September 17, 2014 at 19:09 | Unregistered CommenterMarco
Marco:

<< As my list grows I was thinking about selecting 1 "Must", 2 " Should", and 3 "Coulds" >>

That could work. I will be interested to hear how you get on if you decide to try it.

With this type of grading system you need to watch out for "grade creep" - otherwise everything ends up as an A and you're back to square one. It's usually best to set quotas for A and B, e.g. A's not to be more than 5 per cent of the whole.
September 17, 2014 at 19:57 | Registered CommenterMark Forster