Discussion Forum > why was random task selection effective?
My experience with Random: I used LifeBalance years ago (I believe My Life Organized is derived from this), and it's method was this: Create a pile of tasks, organize and categorize them, and the program generates a list of tasks from among them. You choose one. It prefers tasks you haven't worked on, and kinds of tasks you haven't been doing. You can also establish simple rules to stop stuff coming up when it's not doable.
The random thing worked even though I sometimes found it hard to trust something important wasn't being ignored.
But this method still leaves you with a decision, so it's not exactly the same.
The random thing worked even though I sometimes found it hard to trust something important wasn't being ignored.
But this method still leaves you with a decision, so it's not exactly the same.
December 21, 2014 at 22:40 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
<< Having done the random selection a few times, do you think that randomizing is even more addictive? You keep hoping for a certain task to come up, so you keep playing? >>
( http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2451220#post2452846 )
I found the random approach pleasing (maybe "addictive" is too strong) because it got things moving so easily - resistance just melted away. I found I didn't care which task came up -- I liked them all.
For me, I think part of it was that I didn't need to fret over the decision at all. In the moment, this was gave me a lot of satisfaction. The stress of making decisions was gone -- decision-making was moved to the structural level (how is the list constructed, and what goes on the list?), rather than the task level. This reduced the amount of willpower energy being drained by constantly having to make little decisions, and left more energy for actually doing things.