Discussion Forum > The Pitfalls of Productivity (NYT)
This comment is hilarious. Such a truthy gem:
"If you work in an office, then most of what you produce is inherently garbage, a fact known to almost everyone except the managers whose job it is to ensure that its production increases unceasingly. Should you be one of those true-believers who can extract personal meaning from the workplace vacuum, then you too are destined for management. Unfortunately, in their quest for 'productivity', this rare breed can only succeed by denying important aspects of their humanity, to the detriment of everyone else."
— Nostranditmus, Brooklyn, NY
"If you work in an office, then most of what you produce is inherently garbage, a fact known to almost everyone except the managers whose job it is to ensure that its production increases unceasingly. Should you be one of those true-believers who can extract personal meaning from the workplace vacuum, then you too are destined for management. Unfortunately, in their quest for 'productivity', this rare breed can only succeed by denying important aspects of their humanity, to the detriment of everyone else."
— Nostranditmus, Brooklyn, NY
January 8, 2015 at 20:20 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
Michael B:
Is this actually true? Do all the contributors to this Forum who work in offices regard most of what they produce as garbage? If you think of the really effective people you have come across at work, do you regard them as denying important aspects of their humanity?
I've worked in an office on and off for quite a few years, and I've never regarded my work as garbage. And the people who I've most respected as effective at work have usually lived very rounded lives.
Is this actually true? Do all the contributors to this Forum who work in offices regard most of what they produce as garbage? If you think of the really effective people you have come across at work, do you regard them as denying important aspects of their humanity?
I've worked in an office on and off for quite a few years, and I've never regarded my work as garbage. And the people who I've most respected as effective at work have usually lived very rounded lives.
January 8, 2015 at 20:34 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark:
That's why I called it a "truthy gem". It's not true, but its sentiment is funny: Many managers love to see people moving about, looking busy (like them) creating reports and paperwork, attending meetings about paperwork, and creating "make work" tasks that look busier when in progress than the higher-level contemplation, design, and experimentation that creates real potential for progress.
That's why I called it a "truthy gem". It's not true, but its sentiment is funny: Many managers love to see people moving about, looking busy (like them) creating reports and paperwork, attending meetings about paperwork, and creating "make work" tasks that look busier when in progress than the higher-level contemplation, design, and experimentation that creates real potential for progress.
January 8, 2015 at 22:13 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
Resuming the conversation...
"“Instead of focusing on how much you can accomplish, focus on how much you can absolutely love what you’re doing.”
― Leo Babauta"
In my view realization of a vision is more important than productivity-as-quantity. That takes focus, which requires the ability to say NO, both to internal habits of thought as well as external tasks, distractions and other people. The vision probably needs to be as much about one's inner attitudes and habits of thought as much as external attainment. An undistracted mind has more power to express a vision in the material world. But a clear vision takes a lot of courage and self-honesty. Most of what we seek is misconceived - "miswanting" : "the act or condition of wanting something with the mistaken belief that it will bring one happiness".
"“Instead of focusing on how much you can accomplish, focus on how much you can absolutely love what you’re doing.”
― Leo Babauta"
In my view realization of a vision is more important than productivity-as-quantity. That takes focus, which requires the ability to say NO, both to internal habits of thought as well as external tasks, distractions and other people. The vision probably needs to be as much about one's inner attitudes and habits of thought as much as external attainment. An undistracted mind has more power to express a vision in the material world. But a clear vision takes a lot of courage and self-honesty. Most of what we seek is misconceived - "miswanting" : "the act or condition of wanting something with the mistaken belief that it will bring one happiness".
May 19, 2015 at 14:19 |
michael
michael
michael:
Interesting that you should say that just now, since one of the changes I'm making in my "perfect version" of FV is to change the question from "What do I want to do before I do x ?" to "What do I want to do more than I want to do x ?" This is on the theory that life is too short to spend our time doing stuff we don't want to do.
Interesting that you should say that just now, since one of the changes I'm making in my "perfect version" of FV is to change the question from "What do I want to do before I do x ?" to "What do I want to do more than I want to do x ?" This is on the theory that life is too short to spend our time doing stuff we don't want to do.
May 19, 2015 at 16:10 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark, I approve because "before" was a keyword that tripped me up. I had many things I didn't care much about when they were done (now is fine), and so I couldn't adequately define if one thing should come before. Also there were tasks where I felt a significant "ought" that shoved themselves in the list when I wasn't feeling ready.
May 19, 2015 at 22:13 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Mark,
"Interesting that you should say that just now, since one of the changes I'm making in my "perfect version" of FV is to change the question from "What do I want to do before I do x ?" to "What do I want to do more than I want to do x ?" This is on the theory that life is too short to spend our time doing stuff we don't want to do."
I've tried variations of "What would I rather do right now than X?" I'm eager to see what your other changes are.
"Interesting that you should say that just now, since one of the changes I'm making in my "perfect version" of FV is to change the question from "What do I want to do before I do x ?" to "What do I want to do more than I want to do x ?" This is on the theory that life is too short to spend our time doing stuff we don't want to do."
I've tried variations of "What would I rather do right now than X?" I'm eager to see what your other changes are.
May 20, 2015 at 0:18 |
Austin
Austin
@Mark Forster
Ooooh, going to maximize structured procrastination, eh? I think I can visualize what you are going to do. Very intriguing, I can't wait to see whether I guessed it right :)
Ooooh, going to maximize structured procrastination, eh? I think I can visualize what you are going to do. Very intriguing, I can't wait to see whether I guessed it right :)
May 20, 2015 at 1:58 |
nuntym
nuntym
Mark:
Interesting to compare what you're doing to a writing/listening method called "Proprioceptive Writing" (inner hearing).
"Proprioceptive" as in "awareness of internal stimuli" - listening to your response to what you write.
There is a useable summary at
http://www.jnoelpsychotherapy.com/articles/2012/2/18/proprioceptive-writing-journaling-meditation-and-therapy.html
The originator's book is http://amzn.to/1cOLhCx
Interesting to compare what you're doing to a writing/listening method called "Proprioceptive Writing" (inner hearing).
"Proprioceptive" as in "awareness of internal stimuli" - listening to your response to what you write.
There is a useable summary at
http://www.jnoelpsychotherapy.com/articles/2012/2/18/proprioceptive-writing-journaling-meditation-and-therapy.html
The originator's book is http://amzn.to/1cOLhCx
May 20, 2015 at 14:09 |
michael
michael
michael:
My new system is only a method of working a time management list - not a solution to all of life's problems!
On the other hand...
My new system is only a method of working a time management list - not a solution to all of life's problems!
On the other hand...
May 20, 2015 at 20:43 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark
With your change of question in FV have you just given us the answer to the Perfect Management System we are waiting for in the main blog?!
With your change of question in FV have you just given us the answer to the Perfect Management System we are waiting for in the main blog?!
May 20, 2015 at 20:53 |
Skeg
Skeg
@Skeg
On Mark Forster's behalf (and yes to derail the thread a bit, sorry) he did say that the new algorithm question is "one of the changes I'm making," not the only change to FV. Besides the whole system might still change pending on Mark's testing of the system. And, to be honest, if that is the only change I'd be sorely disappointed because many people had tried to use that same question on FV simply because of a misunderstanding of the question "What do I want to do before I do x ?", and as far as I know all attempts at that failed. FV really has to change before the new question could be used.
(And I yes I have a guess on what those changes are :D)
On Mark Forster's behalf (and yes to derail the thread a bit, sorry) he did say that the new algorithm question is "one of the changes I'm making," not the only change to FV. Besides the whole system might still change pending on Mark's testing of the system. And, to be honest, if that is the only change I'd be sorely disappointed because many people had tried to use that same question on FV simply because of a misunderstanding of the question "What do I want to do before I do x ?", and as far as I know all attempts at that failed. FV really has to change before the new question could be used.
(And I yes I have a guess on what those changes are :D)
May 20, 2015 at 23:42 |
nuntym
nuntym
Skeg:
<< With your change of question in FV have you just given us the answer to the Perfect Management System we are waiting for in the main blog?! >>
A bit of it.
Though the new system will work with the old question if you prefer it, or any other suitable one for that matter.
<< With your change of question in FV have you just given us the answer to the Perfect Management System we are waiting for in the main blog?! >>
A bit of it.
Though the new system will work with the old question if you prefer it, or any other suitable one for that matter.
May 21, 2015 at 0:52 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
nuntym:
<< And I yes I have a guess on what those changes are :D >>
Judging by what you wrote earlier, you probably haven't got it right. But I'd be very interested to know what you thought it might be.
<< And I yes I have a guess on what those changes are :D >>
Judging by what you wrote earlier, you probably haven't got it right. But I'd be very interested to know what you thought it might be.
May 21, 2015 at 0:54 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
@Mark Forster
It's actually good if I missed my guess, the surprise would be intact when it comes out. But anyways, my guess.
1. Mark the first task. Think of this as task "x".
2. Scan down for and mark a task that answers the question "What do I want to do more than I want to do x?" This newly marked task becomes the new task x.
3. Keep on marking tasks until you cannot mark any more tasks that answer the algorithm question. You should have a chain of marked tasks now. Alternatively, you may not have been able to mark more tasks in the first place.
4. Do the last marked task and delete when done, if needed rewrite at the end.
5. Do not do the next task right away. Instead, use the algorithm again: think of the last marked task as "x", then go back to step 2. If all of the chain was acted on, go back to step 1.
It's actually good if I missed my guess, the surprise would be intact when it comes out. But anyways, my guess.
1. Mark the first task. Think of this as task "x".
2. Scan down for and mark a task that answers the question "What do I want to do more than I want to do x?" This newly marked task becomes the new task x.
3. Keep on marking tasks until you cannot mark any more tasks that answer the algorithm question. You should have a chain of marked tasks now. Alternatively, you may not have been able to mark more tasks in the first place.
4. Do the last marked task and delete when done, if needed rewrite at the end.
5. Do not do the next task right away. Instead, use the algorithm again: think of the last marked task as "x", then go back to step 2. If all of the chain was acted on, go back to step 1.
May 21, 2015 at 2:16 |
nuntym
nuntym
That actually sounds pretty good, nuntym. I like the idea of immediate reassessment, but only from the last marked task – which would often be near the end. Might require an occasional reset (erasure of all the marks), though, when context changes.
May 21, 2015 at 5:11 |
ubi
ubi
This topic has gone way off the rails. Someone should create a new post: guesses on Mark's PERFECT refinement to FV. It belongs in the FV Forum, n'est-ce pas?
May 21, 2015 at 5:17 |
ubi
ubi
nuntym:
<< But anyways, my guess.>>
Close but no cigar!
Actually you're much closer than I thought you would be, but what you are suggesting is one of the alternatives that I considered when I first brought out FV. With a long list though it just takes too long to keep re-assessing tasks in this way.
Then just before I went on holiday, I realized that I was missing the obvious!
<< But anyways, my guess.>>
Close but no cigar!
Actually you're much closer than I thought you would be, but what you are suggesting is one of the alternatives that I considered when I first brought out FV. With a long list though it just takes too long to keep re-assessing tasks in this way.
Then just before I went on holiday, I realized that I was missing the obvious!
May 21, 2015 at 11:26 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark
I don't care if I have to pay or not but with your last comment you are just teasing us! If you are looking for an quick way to make some money and meet site visitors demand for the system asap we could pay some amount via your payment button and you could send each person who pays an email with the instructions. Or put something onto Amazon (not sure how quickly that would load).
I don't care if I have to pay or not but with your last comment you are just teasing us! If you are looking for an quick way to make some money and meet site visitors demand for the system asap we could pay some amount via your payment button and you could send each person who pays an email with the instructions. Or put something onto Amazon (not sure how quickly that would load).
May 21, 2015 at 11:54 |
skeg
skeg
skeg:
I just didn't want to pre-empt the instructions, which are now up on the Blog and free of charge to all.
The "obvious" bit is that you don't have to scan from the "next task", only from the task you've just done. This saves a lot of time if the list is long.
Ubi's idea of assessing from the last marked task would on the other hand miss a whole load of tasks that ought to be assessed.
The reason for this is that you have already established that there are no tasks you want to do more than the next task between it and the task you have just done.
I just didn't want to pre-empt the instructions, which are now up on the Blog and free of charge to all.
The "obvious" bit is that you don't have to scan from the "next task", only from the task you've just done. This saves a lot of time if the list is long.
Ubi's idea of assessing from the last marked task would on the other hand miss a whole load of tasks that ought to be assessed.
The reason for this is that you have already established that there are no tasks you want to do more than the next task between it and the task you have just done.
May 21, 2015 at 13:54 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
When I started doing nuntym's DECAF variation on Monday, I noticed that whether the question was "what would help me do this task" (which doesn't require looking at the whole list) or the the question mentioned above, "what do I WANT to do more than X?" (which does require looking through the whole list, which is daunting) was that what WANTED to do more than X and what would HELP get X done more than looking through the list was to just get started on the current chain because I had less resistance to start working than to look through the list. So I would just get started on what I had marked.
My problem is that on the first day it started turning into a mind dump and I wrote down 3 and a half pages for the first day (and I put home and work on the same list, since I noticed DECAF time based dismissal can worked in any order; you just skip out of context tasks until later). Granted, most of these tasks may end up getting dismissed (or not) but right now it's hard (with my attention span) to look through the whole list.
I'm not sure if the above is the obvious solution Mark hinted at to not looking through the whole list, but it is for me. Alternatives might be to stop after the current page, one page, the current section, or whenever you get tired of looking as I mentioned above (desire to do it is greater than the desire to look at list), or when you're fairly confident the item you have picked really stands out.
Another problem I have is since it's not electronic, it is hard to find something I know is the list, but I want to do before x (or would help me do x), or I don't remember if I wrote it down already). The obvious solution there is to put it at the end of the list and mark it (like in DECAF where you can add items to the end of the list that will help with x). Then you're done marking! When you run across the duplicate later, you can update it then.
I guess what I'm saying is I'd rather not have to look at the whole list, but I don't think that is the whole answer, because I think I'm still neglecting some areas. But I do want what I do to build upon itself to make progress on goals in all the necessary or desired areas of work or life. I don't think the answer is strict scheduling because you need to do things that make the most sense for that day, and I think that can change every day.
Maybe the obvious answer is if the list is too long you have to make it smaller somehow. Maybe a more aggressive dismissal process, whatever that might be.
My problem is that on the first day it started turning into a mind dump and I wrote down 3 and a half pages for the first day (and I put home and work on the same list, since I noticed DECAF time based dismissal can worked in any order; you just skip out of context tasks until later). Granted, most of these tasks may end up getting dismissed (or not) but right now it's hard (with my attention span) to look through the whole list.
I'm not sure if the above is the obvious solution Mark hinted at to not looking through the whole list, but it is for me. Alternatives might be to stop after the current page, one page, the current section, or whenever you get tired of looking as I mentioned above (desire to do it is greater than the desire to look at list), or when you're fairly confident the item you have picked really stands out.
Another problem I have is since it's not electronic, it is hard to find something I know is the list, but I want to do before x (or would help me do x), or I don't remember if I wrote it down already). The obvious solution there is to put it at the end of the list and mark it (like in DECAF where you can add items to the end of the list that will help with x). Then you're done marking! When you run across the duplicate later, you can update it then.
I guess what I'm saying is I'd rather not have to look at the whole list, but I don't think that is the whole answer, because I think I'm still neglecting some areas. But I do want what I do to build upon itself to make progress on goals in all the necessary or desired areas of work or life. I don't think the answer is strict scheduling because you need to do things that make the most sense for that day, and I think that can change every day.
Maybe the obvious answer is if the list is too long you have to make it smaller somehow. Maybe a more aggressive dismissal process, whatever that might be.
May 21, 2015 at 14:26 |
Don R
Don R
Don, I haven't read DECAF, but I think you can't mix the systems like that. In any event, a brain dump of all the things that can contribute to you reaching your goal is definitely not what you want on an FV list.
I think what you really want is for any large task or project, to identify the next actionable step. This may take some planning or brainstorming to really think things through, but eventually you can narrow it down to one of two things you could work on now. Put only those one or two items on the end of your actionable list (e.g. FV), and leave the rest with your project notes to consult at a later time.
Now that you've trimmed the contents, FV is really much easier than you make it out to be. There's no search, no comprehensive understanding of its contents. You simply look at one task (which you want to do) and the next task and decide whether or not to do it before the previously selected task. If not, compare the first and the third. Ultimately, just scan straight down, looking for something that will be done before that first until you find one.
But definitely restart with a small list, and either try FVP or DECAF but not the combination.
I think what you really want is for any large task or project, to identify the next actionable step. This may take some planning or brainstorming to really think things through, but eventually you can narrow it down to one of two things you could work on now. Put only those one or two items on the end of your actionable list (e.g. FV), and leave the rest with your project notes to consult at a later time.
Now that you've trimmed the contents, FV is really much easier than you make it out to be. There's no search, no comprehensive understanding of its contents. You simply look at one task (which you want to do) and the next task and decide whether or not to do it before the previously selected task. If not, compare the first and the third. Ultimately, just scan straight down, looking for something that will be done before that first until you find one.
But definitely restart with a small list, and either try FVP or DECAF but not the combination.
May 21, 2015 at 15:55 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Thanks Alan. I will reply in the FV/FVP forum.
May 21, 2015 at 16:50 |
Don R
Don R
michael:
<< Interesting to compare what you're doing to a writing/listening method called "Proprioceptive Writing" (inner hearing). >>
Thanks for recommending this. I ordered the book and am now reading it with great interest. I'll be interested to see how the method compares with "Wild Mind" and other books on the subject.
<< Interesting to compare what you're doing to a writing/listening method called "Proprioceptive Writing" (inner hearing). >>
Thanks for recommending this. I ordered the book and am now reading it with great interest. I'll be interested to see how the method compares with "Wild Mind" and other books on the subject.
May 21, 2015 at 17:39 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
I wrote about this book in one of my typically rambling blog posts of the time: http://www.brownstudy.info/2008/12/30/on-specifying-your-terms/
I think the PW method offers a useful technique that I still employ when doing simple journaling or even talking to myself, though I consider a lot of the mood-setting around it (the candle, Baroque music) optional.
I think the PW method offers a useful technique that I still employ when doing simple journaling or even talking to myself, though I consider a lot of the mood-setting around it (the candle, Baroque music) optional.
May 21, 2015 at 19:22 |
Mike Brown
Mike Brown
http://op-talk.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/10/16/the-pitfalls-of-productivity/?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&bicmp=AD&bicmlukp=WT.mc_id&bicmst=1409232722000&bicmet=1419773522000&_r=1