Discussion Forum > Listing it again
Alan,
Now that you mention it ..... :)
I like the No List system because I need to carefully choose what to do next.
When I do that, I end up doing what to do what is uppermost on my mind.
All that is well and good. It's tough, no doubt, but the thought that is put to writing the next task is worth the effort, I think.
However, my own problem is that there I have a fair number of tasks that are due on specific dates, some with longer time horizons. They need attention, because they tend to be heavy duty tasks that are best handled by taking bite chunks of effort at them, cumulatively adding up to finishing the task stress-free by the due date. Otherwise, the choke at the end of the road results in long hours and late nights.
So, that means I have to maintain a list of tasks that have a due date. The choices I have to make daily with the no-list system requires me to refer to them frequently, to pick up things that I need to pay attention to regularly. Otherwise, they just get cancelled out in the daily noise of the day.
So, effectively, am I not simply doing what you are already doing as system? Referring to the backlog, then putting it into my doing list? It seems to me that I am.
Why not just acknowledge that I need a list, and work off the list instead? Seems far less tedious that to have to refer to a list of dated tasks constantly. To that extent, I am with you on the need to have a list.
By the way, your system has elements of superfocus in it, would I be correct to say that?
Now that you mention it ..... :)
I like the No List system because I need to carefully choose what to do next.
When I do that, I end up doing what to do what is uppermost on my mind.
All that is well and good. It's tough, no doubt, but the thought that is put to writing the next task is worth the effort, I think.
However, my own problem is that there I have a fair number of tasks that are due on specific dates, some with longer time horizons. They need attention, because they tend to be heavy duty tasks that are best handled by taking bite chunks of effort at them, cumulatively adding up to finishing the task stress-free by the due date. Otherwise, the choke at the end of the road results in long hours and late nights.
So, that means I have to maintain a list of tasks that have a due date. The choices I have to make daily with the no-list system requires me to refer to them frequently, to pick up things that I need to pay attention to regularly. Otherwise, they just get cancelled out in the daily noise of the day.
So, effectively, am I not simply doing what you are already doing as system? Referring to the backlog, then putting it into my doing list? It seems to me that I am.
Why not just acknowledge that I need a list, and work off the list instead? Seems far less tedious that to have to refer to a list of dated tasks constantly. To that extent, I am with you on the need to have a list.
By the way, your system has elements of superfocus in it, would I be correct to say that?
June 9, 2016 at 15:18 |
JD
JD
JD:
<< Why not just acknowledge that I need a list, and work off the list instead? Seems far less tedious that to have to refer to a list of dated tasks constantly. >>
Why not just put the due dates in your calendar? (and maybe the start dates too)
<< Why not just acknowledge that I need a list, and work off the list instead? Seems far less tedious that to have to refer to a list of dated tasks constantly. >>
Why not just put the due dates in your calendar? (and maybe the start dates too)
June 9, 2016 at 15:34 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Alan:
<< Then I tend to check-out and distract myself with something that's easy but doesn't even need doing. >>
Why not check-out and distract yourself with something that's easy but _does_ need doing?
<< Then I tend to check-out and distract myself with something that's easy but doesn't even need doing. >>
Why not check-out and distract yourself with something that's easy but _does_ need doing?
June 9, 2016 at 15:45 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
JD: yes, it does resemble SF, but it predates it and is less demanding.
Mark: Good thought, but I found that without a list of choices, it wasn't happening. The key word here is Resistance, and I couldn't reliably get past it.
Mark: Good thought, but I found that without a list of choices, it wasn't happening. The key word here is Resistance, and I couldn't reliably get past it.
June 9, 2016 at 17:35 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Mark,
<Why not just put the due dates in your calendar? (and maybe the start dates too) >
That is something I thought about, but never tried.
I will try it out.
I've reasoned that a scheduled task on a calendar is nothing more than a list of dated tasks, so why bother? Instead of looking at a list, I am merely substituting that by looking at a calendar with tasks that have a start or due date.
But I must try it out and see what effect it has on the no list system.
So, the flow will be something like this on my no list task:
- Look at calendar schedule
[pick Task A as next ask from the calendar, as it has a start date of today or a due date that is coming up ]
-Cross off - Look at calendar schedule
-Look at calendar schedule (re-entered)
-Task A
<Why not just put the due dates in your calendar? (and maybe the start dates too) >
That is something I thought about, but never tried.
I will try it out.
I've reasoned that a scheduled task on a calendar is nothing more than a list of dated tasks, so why bother? Instead of looking at a list, I am merely substituting that by looking at a calendar with tasks that have a start or due date.
But I must try it out and see what effect it has on the no list system.
So, the flow will be something like this on my no list task:
- Look at calendar schedule
[pick Task A as next ask from the calendar, as it has a start date of today or a due date that is coming up ]
-Cross off - Look at calendar schedule
-Look at calendar schedule (re-entered)
-Task A
June 9, 2016 at 18:43 |
JD
JD
Clarification because of JD's comment on Superfocus: where my rule says to reenter in th DOING column, I mean on the last page as with all Autofocus systems, and not on the page you're looking at as Superfocus would have you do.
June 9, 2016 at 19:42 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Alan,
Have you tried reentering unfinished tasks on today's left TODO column rather than on the right DOING column? That way, the DOING column would be a simple ordered log for the day, and you wouldn't need to futz with crossing things off it or cycling around it. You could still put a check mark or other indicator on the tasks that you actually finish. An added benefit is that you would only need to consider the left side of all your Backlog pages.
Have you tried reentering unfinished tasks on today's left TODO column rather than on the right DOING column? That way, the DOING column would be a simple ordered log for the day, and you wouldn't need to futz with crossing things off it or cycling around it. You could still put a check mark or other indicator on the tasks that you actually finish. An added benefit is that you would only need to consider the left side of all your Backlog pages.
June 9, 2016 at 20:43 |
ubi
ubi
Ubi, as long as you are referring to tasks that I'm setting aside for a future day, and not tasks I intend to continue working on today, I agree that's a valid approach. (If you mean otherwise, that's valid but entirely different from my aims here.)
I am more interested in discussing the merits of a list-scanning approach generally rather than details of my method.
I am more interested in discussing the merits of a list-scanning approach generally rather than details of my method.
June 9, 2016 at 21:27 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
As I get back into running my old method, I am recalling details of its operation that are critical to me, though perhaps nobody else, and which aren't part of the rules. You're all aware of similar things in systems such as AutoFocus: the idea of doing things little and often, the importance of dismissal, the need to keep the list tight, the use of intuition, managing the speed at which you traverse the list.
Likewise, I designed my system for a particular cadence which the rules don't enforce. When I go through the pages, I aim to build up a set of tasks which I will focus on today. Each task I pick up, I only get it primed, write it on the Doing list, reflect on the current content of that list, before proceeding to select any more tasks. And these tasks are selected or ignored based on how I feel about adding to my workload (What else should be done and/or can I easily do in addition to these.)
The entire list, including initial work on the selected tasks, might be covered in 15 minutes. And after that I have my work list ready to be operated pretty much how a no-lister would be operating the accumulated tasks. There will be 2-5 tasks there, and I focus on getting done what needs to be with them. So in essence the selection process is a planning session.
None of the above is obvious from looking at the rules. Indeed you could follow the rules and do something completely different from me. Perhaps with success. I find this openness fascinating.
Likewise, I designed my system for a particular cadence which the rules don't enforce. When I go through the pages, I aim to build up a set of tasks which I will focus on today. Each task I pick up, I only get it primed, write it on the Doing list, reflect on the current content of that list, before proceeding to select any more tasks. And these tasks are selected or ignored based on how I feel about adding to my workload (What else should be done and/or can I easily do in addition to these.)
The entire list, including initial work on the selected tasks, might be covered in 15 minutes. And after that I have my work list ready to be operated pretty much how a no-lister would be operating the accumulated tasks. There will be 2-5 tasks there, and I focus on getting done what needs to be with them. So in essence the selection process is a planning session.
None of the above is obvious from looking at the rules. Indeed you could follow the rules and do something completely different from me. Perhaps with success. I find this openness fascinating.
June 11, 2016 at 0:08 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Alan: "Who else is with me on using a list?"
Me, still using ADT - http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2599963
Me, still using ADT - http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2599963
June 13, 2016 at 3:01 |
nuntym
nuntym
Me as well.
June 13, 2016 at 11:18 |
learning as I go
learning as I go
I'm with you using a list. Thank you, Alan, for the thread. I've been meaning to write on this for a while.
I have used a no list system for about a month and there were two problems. First, I end up with this oppressive feeling deep in my psyche - a kind of tension which felt actually a bit like a cross between depression, exacerbation and just being overwhelmed. I’ve felt this before, usually when I experiment with a time management method that no longer works for me. The moment I returned to my catch-all list (FVP this time) the feeling was immediately lifted and has remained gone for the last week. (I know, Mark, that you may have experienced this same feeling when you went back to AF for a while, so it is a matter of finding a system that works or us. I’m just sharing my experience). But more importantly for me, operating out of the no-list system left several very important commitments uncompleted, much to my embarrassment. Things did slip through the cracks.
So here’s my brief analysis and an explanation of why I returned to FVP:
- The "no list" system is fine for working on goals and tasks that are of benefit myself, however when it comes to commitments I make to others, which are no less important, it fails - these commitments are too easy to forget in favour of what is immediately on my mind. My concern is that the no-list system will be ultimately self-serving rather than other serving. My own purpose in life is to serve others, to build relationships, which means that very often I make commitments to others that need to be honoured and, just as importantly, remembered. It is easier to remember things that I need to do to meet my own goals, but I’m not actually here for myself, I’m here for others.
- Memory is important here. I know it has been suggested that we can still use the no list system and just write tasks in a calendar, but here’s my question: why not just write it in a list? It will still be remembered, and elegantly so. I refer here to David Allen’s observation about "psychic drag,” which I believe is true. Getting our commitments out of our heads and into a trustworthy system is very liberating. Let’s face it, things that remain in short term memory are very easily forgotten. And there are some things we really should not forget. I don’t think there is a better system for remembering things than writing them on an AF list.
- My third point is about the characterization of a "catch-all” list. I believe there is an underlying assumption in discussing the catch all list that the purpose of such a list is to make an effort to capture everything you need to do and then get the list down to zero. I agree that this is impossible. But for me, this is not the purpose of the catch-all list - at all. Using FVP (or the random method) is simply about (1) writing down a task as it occurs to me, without any kind of censorship, and (2) making an intelligent choice about what to do next, referring to the applying of some kind of algorithm to the list. There is no obligation for me to complete the list or write everything I need to do - I could care less about that. What I do care about is doing the right thing and doing it well. If the list gets smaller, that’s awesome, it means the volume of my work going out is at least similar to the volume of work going out. If not, I probably need to adjust my level of commitments somehow.
Those are my thoughts. So for me, something like FVP works because (1) it helps me remember and serve the needs of others, and (2) it allows me to feel very confident about my work, knowing that what I am doing at the moment is the right thing to be doing. I can only add, with others, that Mark, your AF systems, including FVP and random are positively brilliant. Thank you for your gift to us.
I have used a no list system for about a month and there were two problems. First, I end up with this oppressive feeling deep in my psyche - a kind of tension which felt actually a bit like a cross between depression, exacerbation and just being overwhelmed. I’ve felt this before, usually when I experiment with a time management method that no longer works for me. The moment I returned to my catch-all list (FVP this time) the feeling was immediately lifted and has remained gone for the last week. (I know, Mark, that you may have experienced this same feeling when you went back to AF for a while, so it is a matter of finding a system that works or us. I’m just sharing my experience). But more importantly for me, operating out of the no-list system left several very important commitments uncompleted, much to my embarrassment. Things did slip through the cracks.
So here’s my brief analysis and an explanation of why I returned to FVP:
- The "no list" system is fine for working on goals and tasks that are of benefit myself, however when it comes to commitments I make to others, which are no less important, it fails - these commitments are too easy to forget in favour of what is immediately on my mind. My concern is that the no-list system will be ultimately self-serving rather than other serving. My own purpose in life is to serve others, to build relationships, which means that very often I make commitments to others that need to be honoured and, just as importantly, remembered. It is easier to remember things that I need to do to meet my own goals, but I’m not actually here for myself, I’m here for others.
- Memory is important here. I know it has been suggested that we can still use the no list system and just write tasks in a calendar, but here’s my question: why not just write it in a list? It will still be remembered, and elegantly so. I refer here to David Allen’s observation about "psychic drag,” which I believe is true. Getting our commitments out of our heads and into a trustworthy system is very liberating. Let’s face it, things that remain in short term memory are very easily forgotten. And there are some things we really should not forget. I don’t think there is a better system for remembering things than writing them on an AF list.
- My third point is about the characterization of a "catch-all” list. I believe there is an underlying assumption in discussing the catch all list that the purpose of such a list is to make an effort to capture everything you need to do and then get the list down to zero. I agree that this is impossible. But for me, this is not the purpose of the catch-all list - at all. Using FVP (or the random method) is simply about (1) writing down a task as it occurs to me, without any kind of censorship, and (2) making an intelligent choice about what to do next, referring to the applying of some kind of algorithm to the list. There is no obligation for me to complete the list or write everything I need to do - I could care less about that. What I do care about is doing the right thing and doing it well. If the list gets smaller, that’s awesome, it means the volume of my work going out is at least similar to the volume of work going out. If not, I probably need to adjust my level of commitments somehow.
Those are my thoughts. So for me, something like FVP works because (1) it helps me remember and serve the needs of others, and (2) it allows me to feel very confident about my work, knowing that what I am doing at the moment is the right thing to be doing. I can only add, with others, that Mark, your AF systems, including FVP and random are positively brilliant. Thank you for your gift to us.
June 13, 2016 at 16:30 |
Paul MacNeil
Paul MacNeil
Hi Paul
Your post is beautifully written. Even though I use my own version of DIT to help manage my own particular challenges, your sentiments truly resonated with me... especially the last line.
Thank you for your gift to us.
Although I still have a hard time (and always will), the struggle has been reduced drastically.
In the thread: The Woop Method, I stated
< truncated>
"Mark’s DIT principles help me tremendously. I am so grateful that he wrote that book! I never knew that I could do my dreaded work in any order and work on it incrementally. It was a revelation!
< truncated>
. I only wish Mark wrote DIT in 1956 when I first started school. My entire life would have been far easier!
Thanks again, Paul for taking the time to so beautifully and succinctly articulate what many of us are also thinking.
Your post is beautifully written. Even though I use my own version of DIT to help manage my own particular challenges, your sentiments truly resonated with me... especially the last line.
Thank you for your gift to us.
Although I still have a hard time (and always will), the struggle has been reduced drastically.
In the thread: The Woop Method, I stated
< truncated>
"Mark’s DIT principles help me tremendously. I am so grateful that he wrote that book! I never knew that I could do my dreaded work in any order and work on it incrementally. It was a revelation!
< truncated>
. I only wish Mark wrote DIT in 1956 when I first started school. My entire life would have been far easier!
Thanks again, Paul for taking the time to so beautifully and succinctly articulate what many of us are also thinking.
June 13, 2016 at 20:40 |
learning as I go
learning as I go
p.s.
I severely truncated my posts because I was heavily medicated (I tore some internal stitches that they needed to fix). Please don't bother reading the drug-induced and low spirits gibberish. LOL!
I severely truncated my posts because I was heavily medicated (I tore some internal stitches that they needed to fix). Please don't bother reading the drug-induced and low spirits gibberish. LOL!
June 13, 2016 at 20:58 |
learning as I go
learning as I go
All:
I don't want to give the impression that I think that people who give up on no-list aren't doing it properly. But I do think there's a tendency to imagine that a no-list system is a sort of challenge to do exactly what you would do with a "catch-all" system, but you have to do it from memory. In other words it's like being a concert pianist playing a piano piece without the score in front of them.
But actually it's more like being a jazz pianist. It's not that a jazz pianist doesn't have the score in front of them - there is no score. What you end up playing is completely different from what you would have played if you had it all written down in musical notation. Similarly, with no-list what you end up doing is completely different from what you would have done if you had everything written down in a "catch-all" list. Like the jazz musician, you are aiming for not just a different result, but a completely different type of result.
It's not for everyone - just as some pianists are jazz musicians and some are not. There's no shame in not using no-list. But don't imagine that no-list is intended to do the same job as catch-all, any more than jazz is intended to be the same as classical music.
I don't want to give the impression that I think that people who give up on no-list aren't doing it properly. But I do think there's a tendency to imagine that a no-list system is a sort of challenge to do exactly what you would do with a "catch-all" system, but you have to do it from memory. In other words it's like being a concert pianist playing a piano piece without the score in front of them.
But actually it's more like being a jazz pianist. It's not that a jazz pianist doesn't have the score in front of them - there is no score. What you end up playing is completely different from what you would have played if you had it all written down in musical notation. Similarly, with no-list what you end up doing is completely different from what you would have done if you had everything written down in a "catch-all" list. Like the jazz musician, you are aiming for not just a different result, but a completely different type of result.
It's not for everyone - just as some pianists are jazz musicians and some are not. There's no shame in not using no-list. But don't imagine that no-list is intended to do the same job as catch-all, any more than jazz is intended to be the same as classical music.
June 13, 2016 at 23:23 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Paul MacNeil:
<< operating out of the no-list system left several very important commitments uncompleted, much to my embarrassment. >>
I'm interested to know how this happened. Did you just forget about them, or what? You're not talking about forgetting a few minor tasks here and there. These were "very important commitments" - several of them. I would have expected them to be in the forefront of your mind.
<< Memory is important here. >>
As I've said many times, no-list systems are not about memory. See my previous post.
<< I know it has been suggested that we can still use the no list system and just write tasks in a calendar >>
Not by me it hasn't. I've said that it's ok to write reminders of things that you must do at a specific time or date. A calendar is the obvious place for these. That's all.
<< The "no list" system is fine for working on goals and tasks that are of benefit myself, however when it comes to commitments I make to others, which are no less important, it fails - these commitments are too easy to forget in favour of what is immediately on my mind. My concern is that the no-list system will be ultimately self-serving rather than other serving. My own purpose in life is to serve others, to build relationships, which means that very often I make commitments to others that need to be honoured and, just as importantly, remembered. >>
I find this very difficult to understand. If you see your purpose in life as being to serve others and to build relationships, why are commitments to others so easy to forget? It's like saying that your purpose in life is to be an aerospace engineer but you can never remember to do anything related to aerospace.
<< operating out of the no-list system left several very important commitments uncompleted, much to my embarrassment. >>
I'm interested to know how this happened. Did you just forget about them, or what? You're not talking about forgetting a few minor tasks here and there. These were "very important commitments" - several of them. I would have expected them to be in the forefront of your mind.
<< Memory is important here. >>
As I've said many times, no-list systems are not about memory. See my previous post.
<< I know it has been suggested that we can still use the no list system and just write tasks in a calendar >>
Not by me it hasn't. I've said that it's ok to write reminders of things that you must do at a specific time or date. A calendar is the obvious place for these. That's all.
<< The "no list" system is fine for working on goals and tasks that are of benefit myself, however when it comes to commitments I make to others, which are no less important, it fails - these commitments are too easy to forget in favour of what is immediately on my mind. My concern is that the no-list system will be ultimately self-serving rather than other serving. My own purpose in life is to serve others, to build relationships, which means that very often I make commitments to others that need to be honoured and, just as importantly, remembered. >>
I find this very difficult to understand. If you see your purpose in life as being to serve others and to build relationships, why are commitments to others so easy to forget? It's like saying that your purpose in life is to be an aerospace engineer but you can never remember to do anything related to aerospace.
June 13, 2016 at 23:56 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
The no-List has been a transformative experience for me. It's true it requires a leap of faith, or as I said some time back it's a bit like that moment when learning to swim where you decide to trust yourself and let go of the edge of the pool and later feel so glad that you did.
I've been experimenting with the "May 9th" approach for the last couple of days, but in fact the no-list system that continues to bring me consistently great and satisfying results is the humble 5-Task.
I've been experimenting with the "May 9th" approach for the last couple of days, but in fact the no-list system that continues to bring me consistently great and satisfying results is the humble 5-Task.
June 14, 2016 at 1:00 |
Neil C
Neil C
I'm not sure when they were first called no list systems, but I think it's helpful to think of them as short list systems. You can write anything on your short list, but not everything. At least not all at once. The question I have is this: If something is important to you, why isn't it making it to your short list? In other words, what is crowding it out from your list in the first minute or two after making an important commitment?
I like some long list systems very much, and yet I like nearly every short list system of Mark's. The thing I would recommend if using a long list is to borrow a lesson from Mark's short list systems and begin to "do it now". That is, begin making it a habit of yours to immediately take some initial action on every new commitment that you take on. Actually immediately. Like within minutes of saying, "Yes". And if you can't, should you really be taking that commitment on? And this especially applies to the commitments we make to ourselves.
I like some long list systems very much, and yet I like nearly every short list system of Mark's. The thing I would recommend if using a long list is to borrow a lesson from Mark's short list systems and begin to "do it now". That is, begin making it a habit of yours to immediately take some initial action on every new commitment that you take on. Actually immediately. Like within minutes of saying, "Yes". And if you can't, should you really be taking that commitment on? And this especially applies to the commitments we make to ourselves.
June 14, 2016 at 11:42 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
One system to consider if you want a little more capture capacity along with short "no list" dynamics is to try Mark's "No List FVP". It's the third system down in the following thread:
http://markforster.squarespace.com/fv-forum/post/2562728
When using this system I ask, "But first..." instead of "Is there anything I want to do first?".
http://markforster.squarespace.com/fv-forum/post/2562728
When using this system I ask, "But first..." instead of "Is there anything I want to do first?".
June 14, 2016 at 12:00 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
Mark: "I'm interested to know how this happened. Did you just forget about them, or what?"
Literally, yes, I just forgot about them, and some of them were deeply troubling. I have a ton of things coming across my desk in the run of a day and if I couldn’t get at them right away I would just throw them at my AF list. But when I used the no-list system, many things were missed. Well, perhaps I just have too much stuff coming in. Yes. Or… the no list system just can’t handle the volume, where FVP can.
When wrote above, “my concern is that the no-list system is ultimately self-serving” I realize that that may have come across stronger or more negatively than I intended. It was only an observation about my own experience. I observed, for example, that when I was using my no-list lists, the kinds of tasks that I didn't do were the ones that required me to put the needs of others ahead of my own. I can think of two hospital visits that I should have made but didn’t because I simply forgot about them (I’m a pastor) -(FYI, both patients were being cared for pastorally by other clergy, and we have good systems in place for emergencies - I don't want you to think I'm heartless or anything - although I have my days...) Good old Catholic guilt, for sure, but had they been on my FVP list I would have made the visits. I ask myself: whose needs were being met when I was using the no-list system? Not the two people in the hospital.
Since the no-list system is so highly recommended by Mark, I may be missing some aspect of how it works. I will keep studying it and probably try it again at some point. But back to comfort for the time being.
Literally, yes, I just forgot about them, and some of them were deeply troubling. I have a ton of things coming across my desk in the run of a day and if I couldn’t get at them right away I would just throw them at my AF list. But when I used the no-list system, many things were missed. Well, perhaps I just have too much stuff coming in. Yes. Or… the no list system just can’t handle the volume, where FVP can.
When wrote above, “my concern is that the no-list system is ultimately self-serving” I realize that that may have come across stronger or more negatively than I intended. It was only an observation about my own experience. I observed, for example, that when I was using my no-list lists, the kinds of tasks that I didn't do were the ones that required me to put the needs of others ahead of my own. I can think of two hospital visits that I should have made but didn’t because I simply forgot about them (I’m a pastor) -(FYI, both patients were being cared for pastorally by other clergy, and we have good systems in place for emergencies - I don't want you to think I'm heartless or anything - although I have my days...) Good old Catholic guilt, for sure, but had they been on my FVP list I would have made the visits. I ask myself: whose needs were being met when I was using the no-list system? Not the two people in the hospital.
Since the no-list system is so highly recommended by Mark, I may be missing some aspect of how it works. I will keep studying it and probably try it again at some point. But back to comfort for the time being.
June 14, 2016 at 14:41 |
Paul MacNeil
Paul MacNeil
Regarding forgetting important things... I've been keeping a "Projects List" in addition to my "No-List". But in reality, this has been more like a "things I must not forget" list. It's on a whiteboard, which helps keep it small. It includes commitments, reminders, and deadlines.
I check this list at the beginning of the day—more often if there are several pressing things there.
Over time, I've found some interesting dynamics take shape.
First, I've found myself unwilling to put things on the list -- I really find myself WANTING to keep it short and lean. I've found it easier to say NO to new commitments. This is in contrast to FVP etc., where I'd generate long lists of possibilities to pursue.
Second, I don't like things hanging around on this list. It just creates too much mental clutter. I find myself wanting to just buckle down and get those things done.
Third, this list is not supposed to include ideas or opportunities or someday/maybes—but if those items do find their way onto the list, I prune them really quickly.
Fourth, many items really don't need to be written down—they will come up again naturally in the course of working through a project, or just in walking around the house or office. I might write something like that in the list, but it gets pruned really quickly.
If small things come up during the day, they go onto a dynamic list of "reminders". If anything is left on this list at end of day, and it REALLY must not be forgotten, then it goes into the Commitments list.
I'm not really sure why it works out this way. There is something about the no-list approach that creates an intolerance, even an aversion, to mental clutter, and to backlogs in general.
I check this list at the beginning of the day—more often if there are several pressing things there.
Over time, I've found some interesting dynamics take shape.
First, I've found myself unwilling to put things on the list -- I really find myself WANTING to keep it short and lean. I've found it easier to say NO to new commitments. This is in contrast to FVP etc., where I'd generate long lists of possibilities to pursue.
Second, I don't like things hanging around on this list. It just creates too much mental clutter. I find myself wanting to just buckle down and get those things done.
Third, this list is not supposed to include ideas or opportunities or someday/maybes—but if those items do find their way onto the list, I prune them really quickly.
Fourth, many items really don't need to be written down—they will come up again naturally in the course of working through a project, or just in walking around the house or office. I might write something like that in the list, but it gets pruned really quickly.
If small things come up during the day, they go onto a dynamic list of "reminders". If anything is left on this list at end of day, and it REALLY must not be forgotten, then it goes into the Commitments list.
I'm not really sure why it works out this way. There is something about the no-list approach that creates an intolerance, even an aversion, to mental clutter, and to backlogs in general.
June 14, 2016 at 21:09 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Seraphim:
<< Regarding forgetting important things... I've been keeping a "Projects List" in addition to my "No-List". >>
A list of "authorized projects" is one of the things I recommend in "Secrets of Successful People".
<< Regarding forgetting important things... I've been keeping a "Projects List" in addition to my "No-List". >>
A list of "authorized projects" is one of the things I recommend in "Secrets of Successful People".
June 15, 2016 at 7:19 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Paul MacNeil:
<< yes, I just forgot about them >>
Thanks for clarifying.
<< the no list system just can’t handle the volume, where FVP can. >>
Well, ultimately of course it's you who handles the volume, not a list. The fact that something is written on an FVP list doesn't necessarily mean that it's going to get done. The question I ask people who are afraid of forgetting things with a no-list system is "Did you never fail to get something important done even though you were using a catch-all list?"
The idea of a no-list system is that it prevents you from getting a huge list of ultimately undoable things because it brings you face to face with the reality of what you are actually capable of doing in a day.
It's interesting that you are a pastor because I have worked with a huge of number of pastors in the past. The problem with that sort of job is that it has no boundaries. With probably several hundred people in the church and a felt responsibility for everyone who is not in the church as well, there is literally no limit to the amount of work a pastor could be doing.
I'd recommend reading St Matthew's Gospel with an eye to how Jesus managed his time. It is remarkably clear how he did it. One overriding mission. Clear limited objectives at each stage, clear boundaries, stripping things down to the essentials, insisting on time for prayer, avoiding situations where he knew he'd get overwhelmed. Training. Delegating. You can probably spot more things. And of course no lists!
<< yes, I just forgot about them >>
Thanks for clarifying.
<< the no list system just can’t handle the volume, where FVP can. >>
Well, ultimately of course it's you who handles the volume, not a list. The fact that something is written on an FVP list doesn't necessarily mean that it's going to get done. The question I ask people who are afraid of forgetting things with a no-list system is "Did you never fail to get something important done even though you were using a catch-all list?"
The idea of a no-list system is that it prevents you from getting a huge list of ultimately undoable things because it brings you face to face with the reality of what you are actually capable of doing in a day.
It's interesting that you are a pastor because I have worked with a huge of number of pastors in the past. The problem with that sort of job is that it has no boundaries. With probably several hundred people in the church and a felt responsibility for everyone who is not in the church as well, there is literally no limit to the amount of work a pastor could be doing.
I'd recommend reading St Matthew's Gospel with an eye to how Jesus managed his time. It is remarkably clear how he did it. One overriding mission. Clear limited objectives at each stage, clear boundaries, stripping things down to the essentials, insisting on time for prayer, avoiding situations where he knew he'd get overwhelmed. Training. Delegating. You can probably spot more things. And of course no lists!
June 15, 2016 at 7:50 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
"Did you never fail to get something important done even though you were using a catch-all list?"
No.
No.
June 15, 2016 at 21:02 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu:
You were doing better than me then!
You were doing better than me then!
June 15, 2016 at 22:35 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark: "Did you never fail to get something important done even though you were using a catch-all list?"
Alan: "No."
Mark: "You were doing better than me then!"
Me: Better than me as well!
Alan: "No."
Mark: "You were doing better than me then!"
Me: Better than me as well!
June 16, 2016 at 4:00 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
I love this discussion.
In the end, a catch all list is an inbox. The methods extract focus lists from it in various ways, and, when applied rigorously, eliminate tasks which are unlikely to get done. But the list itself is a lovingly managed inbox.
As such, it's a backlog.
As many have noticed, however, it's there whether you write it down or not. And unless you deal with it in some way, it'll be nagging away at you. So the question is, do you trust that subconscious nagging to get your priorities right? We know that the brain uses a number of heuristics to jump to conclusions which may or may not be sound.
In the end, a catch all list is an inbox. The methods extract focus lists from it in various ways, and, when applied rigorously, eliminate tasks which are unlikely to get done. But the list itself is a lovingly managed inbox.
As such, it's a backlog.
As many have noticed, however, it's there whether you write it down or not. And unless you deal with it in some way, it'll be nagging away at you. So the question is, do you trust that subconscious nagging to get your priorities right? We know that the brain uses a number of heuristics to jump to conclusions which may or may not be sound.
June 16, 2016 at 9:02 |
Will
Will
Will:
<< In the end, a catch all list is an inbox. ...As many have noticed, however, it's there whether you write it down or not. >>
This is absolutely right. If you have an unwritten catch-all list in your mind it will nag away at you and you will be going through hideous mental contortions to remember it. You would be much better off writing it down.
No-list on the other hand does away with the catch-all list in your mind and is basically just a reiteration of the question "What is the best thing I could be doing right now?" No mental contortions needed.
<< In the end, a catch all list is an inbox. ...As many have noticed, however, it's there whether you write it down or not. >>
This is absolutely right. If you have an unwritten catch-all list in your mind it will nag away at you and you will be going through hideous mental contortions to remember it. You would be much better off writing it down.
No-list on the other hand does away with the catch-all list in your mind and is basically just a reiteration of the question "What is the best thing I could be doing right now?" No mental contortions needed.
June 16, 2016 at 15:57 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Hi Will
You stated:
do you trust that subconscious nagging to get your priorities right?
As we've previously discussed, I rely on it 100%. Despite my inclinations, weaknesses and vulnerabilities, it has allowed me to be ambitious, responsible and honorable. Without a lifelong development of my conscientiousness (aspects of character), I shudder to think what kind of life I would have had or what kind of reputation I'd have. LOL!
It's always been my beacon of light shining through my weaknesses. It's a tough road and sometimes an excruciating difficult struggle, it's the right road. It's well worth the extra effort. I wish it was easier for me but it's not. I'll settle for for the struggle because it keeps me where I want to be and reminds me of who I am.
Will, you appear to be a very forthright and enlightened person. Over the years, I have learned much from your comments. Thank you!
You stated:
do you trust that subconscious nagging to get your priorities right?
As we've previously discussed, I rely on it 100%. Despite my inclinations, weaknesses and vulnerabilities, it has allowed me to be ambitious, responsible and honorable. Without a lifelong development of my conscientiousness (aspects of character), I shudder to think what kind of life I would have had or what kind of reputation I'd have. LOL!
It's always been my beacon of light shining through my weaknesses. It's a tough road and sometimes an excruciating difficult struggle, it's the right road. It's well worth the extra effort. I wish it was easier for me but it's not. I'll settle for for the struggle because it keeps me where I want to be and reminds me of who I am.
Will, you appear to be a very forthright and enlightened person. Over the years, I have learned much from your comments. Thank you!
June 16, 2016 at 17:51 |
learning as I go
learning as I go
Hi Mark
You stated:
"What is the best thing I could be doing right now?" No mental contortions needed.
Mark, consider yourself to be a very fortunate man. When I'm battling between high resistance and doing my work in a responsible and timely manner, I go through all kinds of mental contortions.
I don't work off a catch-all list. Because i frequently have to go through mental contortions to get myself doing the work, a catch-all list could prove to be my downfall. I struggle plenty enough without the added temptations.
Of course, I'm not referring to all of my work as needing strenuous mental contortions. Only the important work that carries high resistance for me. read: extreme boredom
Thank you so much. Although I still struggle, the struggle has been greatly reduced thanks to you.
p.s Despite the meds, this is the expression of my grateful heart.
You stated:
"What is the best thing I could be doing right now?" No mental contortions needed.
Mark, consider yourself to be a very fortunate man. When I'm battling between high resistance and doing my work in a responsible and timely manner, I go through all kinds of mental contortions.
I don't work off a catch-all list. Because i frequently have to go through mental contortions to get myself doing the work, a catch-all list could prove to be my downfall. I struggle plenty enough without the added temptations.
Of course, I'm not referring to all of my work as needing strenuous mental contortions. Only the important work that carries high resistance for me. read: extreme boredom
Thank you so much. Although I still struggle, the struggle has been greatly reduced thanks to you.
p.s Despite the meds, this is the expression of my grateful heart.
June 16, 2016 at 18:19 |
learning as I go
learning as I go
I shouldclarify. When I claimed that a catchall list has never failed me in completing importa t items, there are caveats:
1. I'm disregarding some of the less-than-great systems I tried.
2. I only consider a few things truly important.
3. My biggest failing is to neglect the otherwise successful system. When i leave behind what worked, for internal anarchy, then important stuff gets lost. But you can't blame the system when it isnt used.
1. I'm disregarding some of the less-than-great systems I tried.
2. I only consider a few things truly important.
3. My biggest failing is to neglect the otherwise successful system. When i leave behind what worked, for internal anarchy, then important stuff gets lost. But you can't blame the system when it isnt used.
June 20, 2016 at 5:40 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
I returned to this forum a couple of weeks ago after I read Brent's 'Doing Journal'. That posting was interesting as a few months ago I also changed to a Bullet Journal way of working.
Granted this does mix tasks with notes, important messages etc, but the use of symbols on the left makes the tasks noticeable. I have found this very useful and seem to be achieving a higher hit rate of Done Tasks.
As for specific time-tasks, other than start and finish for projects and similar, I use the following:
Outlook for appointments only, work and personal; this can include blocks of time set aside for getting stuff done.
Tasks not needed for/for today: scribble down in notebook, make sure it is entered in Todoist for a date tomorrow or later; every day, Todoist pops up with a list of tasks noted over the next seven days; for really critical future stuff, I set up an alert or Todoist to send to my Windows smartphone.
However, I find that writing tasks helps me more, so I write down any Todoist tasks that appear the next morning into my notebook.
Notebook: I use a Moleskine, approximately A5 size, squared paper, pages numbered for journal entries (helps keep an index); meetings recorded at back of notebook turned upside down, pages lettered A - Z, AA, AB etc.
I have adopted Brent's practice of using colour highlighters when reviewing older pages to mop up anything. If only completed or moribund tasks are highlighted, the undone tasks DO stand out.
So I guess I do still have a list, even though tasks take up less than one page spread across today's 'Daily Log' of 2.5 pages, the rest are notes, jotting and rambling thoughts.
Granted this does mix tasks with notes, important messages etc, but the use of symbols on the left makes the tasks noticeable. I have found this very useful and seem to be achieving a higher hit rate of Done Tasks.
As for specific time-tasks, other than start and finish for projects and similar, I use the following:
Outlook for appointments only, work and personal; this can include blocks of time set aside for getting stuff done.
Tasks not needed for/for today: scribble down in notebook, make sure it is entered in Todoist for a date tomorrow or later; every day, Todoist pops up with a list of tasks noted over the next seven days; for really critical future stuff, I set up an alert or Todoist to send to my Windows smartphone.
However, I find that writing tasks helps me more, so I write down any Todoist tasks that appear the next morning into my notebook.
Notebook: I use a Moleskine, approximately A5 size, squared paper, pages numbered for journal entries (helps keep an index); meetings recorded at back of notebook turned upside down, pages lettered A - Z, AA, AB etc.
I have adopted Brent's practice of using colour highlighters when reviewing older pages to mop up anything. If only completed or moribund tasks are highlighted, the undone tasks DO stand out.
So I guess I do still have a list, even though tasks take up less than one page spread across today's 'Daily Log' of 2.5 pages, the rest are notes, jotting and rambling thoughts.
August 22, 2016 at 16:01 |
Roger J
Roger J
One of the key benefits of Autofocus systems (AF4 was a favorite of mine) was the fact that following a list in first-to-last order reduced the difficulty of choosing, from random "what should I do?" to a simple "does this one task stand out?". That simplicity breaks the paralysis and gets work flowing.
Who else is with me on using a list?
Aside:
<<My method:
0. The notebook:
Draw a line down the middle of the first page. The left side is your TODO list. The right side is your DOING list. Whenever you think of something you want done, add it to the TODO list.
Each day (alt: when a column is full) , start a new page. All previous pages become closed lists and treated as backlog. Observe that the backlog has two columns of tasks: TODO which you added but never started, and DOING which you started but never finished. The rules below don't care about this distinction within the backlog, but this fact is useful in understanding your workload.
1. Select things to work on today (by doing):
On the oldest page of the backlog, select ONE thing to do. Do that (at least a little bit), cross it off and reenter on the DOING list. (P.S. delete things you are no longer intend to do soon.) The aim is to keep the backlog short, so clear out the oldest page one by one.
Continuing through the backlog and today's TODO list, do anything you choose (or nothing), and reenter on the DOING list.
2. Work the things selected:
Loop through your DOING list, doing things as you choose. Cross it off as you do it; rewrite if not done. Mark with a checkmark if you are done with it for today. The aim is keep working on these items until they are all done.
3. If you run out of things in the DOING list, or are stuck, or you need to start something else, return to step 1 to select additional tasks.
>>