Discussion Forum > Bottlenecks and Time Management Systems
Mark wrote:
<< I think one amendment to the rules for all the methods will solve the whole thing for you. "The list must not exceed 80 tasks." >>
If it helps, I only have 37 tasks on my list and they are all of a recurring nature - do email, do post, check spam, action tele call notes, action new clients, etc.
I have them on a spreadsheet with a simple formula to set them to remind me to action every x number of days. I simply put in the date last actioned and the formula shows the next due date to work on the task. AKA plate spinning.
Saves writing out any lists, so zero admin time on keeping track of what to do next.
<< I think one amendment to the rules for all the methods will solve the whole thing for you. "The list must not exceed 80 tasks." >>
If it helps, I only have 37 tasks on my list and they are all of a recurring nature - do email, do post, check spam, action tele call notes, action new clients, etc.
I have them on a spreadsheet with a simple formula to set them to remind me to action every x number of days. I simply put in the date last actioned and the formula shows the next due date to work on the task. AKA plate spinning.
Saves writing out any lists, so zero admin time on keeping track of what to do next.
July 10, 2018 at 14:03 |
MrBacklog
MrBacklog
Mr Backlog
<<I only have 37 tasks on my list and they are all of a recurring nature>>
What do you do with non-recurring tasks: Buy cake for x's birthday; Book appointment with doctor;
Cook family dinner on Wednesday: Plan my next holiday;..
<<I only have 37 tasks on my list and they are all of a recurring nature>>
What do you do with non-recurring tasks: Buy cake for x's birthday; Book appointment with doctor;
Cook family dinner on Wednesday: Plan my next holiday;..
July 11, 2018 at 9:48 |
Jim
Jim
Jim:
I quite often email myself one off tasks knowing they will then get picked up in the main "do email" task category. e.g. buy cake, plan holiday. However, doc appointment, cook and other very date specific tasks are better off put into the diary.
I think the really useful thing about this is recording the date something was last actioned. That way I can see at a glance the next due dates and what is being neglected. It helps automate Mark's "stand out" principles.
It is great having a short list of general category things to do as that prevents overwhelm.
e.g. if 20 items of new post arrived today, then it is pointless listing out things to do from that. Instead simply have "do post" as a weekly recurring task so the post gets cleared in the desired timescale. Best to work direct from the task source. Likewise, I get quite a lot of tele calls, so I make notes in a book with the task and date. I have comfort they will get done as one of my 3 day recurring tasks is to action the telenotes.
I have found I can completely organise my work life just on 30-40 recurring tasks reminders.
I suppose this is not really much different than a simple written list of things to do and then re-write tasks at the end and using stand out to decide what to do next. It just helps a lot knowing when something was last actioned and when it is coming up for action again.
I quite often email myself one off tasks knowing they will then get picked up in the main "do email" task category. e.g. buy cake, plan holiday. However, doc appointment, cook and other very date specific tasks are better off put into the diary.
I think the really useful thing about this is recording the date something was last actioned. That way I can see at a glance the next due dates and what is being neglected. It helps automate Mark's "stand out" principles.
It is great having a short list of general category things to do as that prevents overwhelm.
e.g. if 20 items of new post arrived today, then it is pointless listing out things to do from that. Instead simply have "do post" as a weekly recurring task so the post gets cleared in the desired timescale. Best to work direct from the task source. Likewise, I get quite a lot of tele calls, so I make notes in a book with the task and date. I have comfort they will get done as one of my 3 day recurring tasks is to action the telenotes.
I have found I can completely organise my work life just on 30-40 recurring tasks reminders.
I suppose this is not really much different than a simple written list of things to do and then re-write tasks at the end and using stand out to decide what to do next. It just helps a lot knowing when something was last actioned and when it is coming up for action again.
July 11, 2018 at 13:29 |
MrBacklog
MrBacklog
MrBacklog:
Have you tried emailing reminders to yourself using something like Nudgemail?
http://www.nudgemail.com
Have you tried emailing reminders to yourself using something like Nudgemail?
http://www.nudgemail.com
July 11, 2018 at 14:15 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
That looks good.
I can see how it would be possible to easily manage a recurring task list entirely from there.
However, I tend to get a little nervous of online apps, just in case it goes wrong - or more likely I do it wrong!
I prefer good old fashioned paper or spreadsheet (which feels like a bit of paper on screen to me) so I can see it better.
Might be worth a go with the app out of interest.
I can see how it would be possible to easily manage a recurring task list entirely from there.
However, I tend to get a little nervous of online apps, just in case it goes wrong - or more likely I do it wrong!
I prefer good old fashioned paper or spreadsheet (which feels like a bit of paper on screen to me) so I can see it better.
Might be worth a go with the app out of interest.
July 11, 2018 at 15:56 |
MrBacklog
MrBacklog
MrBacklog:
As well as one-off and/or recurring tasks, they are also useful for sending a letter to your "future self" reminding you what your priorities over the past week/month/year/decade were supposed to be so you can compare what you set out to do with what you've actually done.
As well as one-off and/or recurring tasks, they are also useful for sending a letter to your "future self" reminding you what your priorities over the past week/month/year/decade were supposed to be so you can compare what you set out to do with what you've actually done.
July 11, 2018 at 16:14 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Randomizer can be biased towards high value/priority tasks any number of ways.
One version is to sort tasks into similar categories that are sensible to you.
Such as: finances, home cleaning/fixing, recreation, etc.
Use ranking, one to the next, to find the 1 to 3 best in each cluster.
Put on the actual to do list those 1 to 3 from each.
Beside each task put a # for that categories' biasing.
(This could be done in linear - 1,2,3, . . . ,
nonlinear - square the #s,
customized - 1s for bottom 4 categories, 9s for top 2, and give 2s
to the middle ranks)
I look at the 2nd hand of my watch. I get 1 of 12 #s pseudo-randomly
(if you are psychic, true random if not) to do the counting with.
Highest ranked tasks have higher #s. More likely to be chosen as
I count through tasks, having to pause on large #s longer as I count.
So many other tweaks could be used, such as biasing in terms of
minimum amount of time to spend on tasks selected from one
category versus another.
You could use selecting without replacing, so that you continually
cycle through the initial list until all have been actioned. The #s
greater than 1 get actioned that # of times before being eliminated
from that first list. Draw a line under it. Struck tasks go beneath;
only select-able after the 1st batch is empty. Draw new line & begin
again. This tweak would cause all to be worked on at least once in
some unit of time.
So many variations of rules can be created for the randomizer.
I have enjoyed this forum for years. It is time to offer up something.
I feared having to surrender anonymity -- getting spammed, & such.
Not true! Email address was optional. So you other
lurkers with the same fear and some worthy comments, please
join us.
Perhaps this needs to be placed in some other thread (new?), but
I am inexperienced with posting, and following the earlier comments
from Mr. Forster about this method.
One version is to sort tasks into similar categories that are sensible to you.
Such as: finances, home cleaning/fixing, recreation, etc.
Use ranking, one to the next, to find the 1 to 3 best in each cluster.
Put on the actual to do list those 1 to 3 from each.
Beside each task put a # for that categories' biasing.
(This could be done in linear - 1,2,3, . . . ,
nonlinear - square the #s,
customized - 1s for bottom 4 categories, 9s for top 2, and give 2s
to the middle ranks)
I look at the 2nd hand of my watch. I get 1 of 12 #s pseudo-randomly
(if you are psychic, true random if not) to do the counting with.
Highest ranked tasks have higher #s. More likely to be chosen as
I count through tasks, having to pause on large #s longer as I count.
So many other tweaks could be used, such as biasing in terms of
minimum amount of time to spend on tasks selected from one
category versus another.
You could use selecting without replacing, so that you continually
cycle through the initial list until all have been actioned. The #s
greater than 1 get actioned that # of times before being eliminated
from that first list. Draw a line under it. Struck tasks go beneath;
only select-able after the 1st batch is empty. Draw new line & begin
again. This tweak would cause all to be worked on at least once in
some unit of time.
So many variations of rules can be created for the randomizer.
I have enjoyed this forum for years. It is time to offer up something.
I feared having to surrender anonymity -- getting spammed, & such.
Not true! Email address was optional. So you other
lurkers with the same fear and some worthy comments, please
join us.
Perhaps this needs to be placed in some other thread (new?), but
I am inexperienced with posting, and following the earlier comments
from Mr. Forster about this method.
July 11, 2018 at 23:35 |
FLWfan
FLWfan
When I need to do something quick and easy to stop procrastinating, I often get a number, usually 1-10, and count from the oldest task. Doing something, anything, useful and breaking the stall is more important than finding the exact best thing. (Bonus if it sets me up for future success, but even that is less important than just doing something useful.)
Last month, I started a list of 5 (actually 10) categories, and added a code to each task on the first page of my master list.) Then I rolled for category, and took either the first one in that category or anything in that category that stood out. If I rolled the same category too often, I re-rolled.
It gave good results. Then vacation interrupted the routine and I forgot about it. I'm back to three MITs a day, starting each day with something I enjoy or at least can tie up nicely, but might try it again when that stops working. (I've accepted that any system I use will stop working once I get too used to it, or something appears shinier. Some are worth going back to. Some aren't.)
Last month, I started a list of 5 (actually 10) categories, and added a code to each task on the first page of my master list.) Then I rolled for category, and took either the first one in that category or anything in that category that stood out. If I rolled the same category too often, I re-rolled.
It gave good results. Then vacation interrupted the routine and I forgot about it. I'm back to three MITs a day, starting each day with something I enjoy or at least can tie up nicely, but might try it again when that stops working. (I've accepted that any system I use will stop working once I get too used to it, or something appears shinier. Some are worth going back to. Some aren't.)
July 15, 2018 at 23:17 |
Cricket
Cricket
Cricket, FLWfan, I like both of these ideas. Sometimes weighted gamification helps me a lot.
FLWfan, I especially love the idea of using the second on your watch as a random number generator. I've had great success with Mark's Remelsbach (Random) method, and am currently working on a knitted project using random numbers for stripes, and the availability of a number generator is occasionally an issue.
If your timepiece is digital, 1-12 is hard, but you could get random numbers from 1-5, 1-10, 1-15, 1-30 or 1-60 pretty easily.
FLWfan, I especially love the idea of using the second on your watch as a random number generator. I've had great success with Mark's Remelsbach (Random) method, and am currently working on a knitted project using random numbers for stripes, and the availability of a number generator is occasionally an issue.
If your timepiece is digital, 1-12 is hard, but you could get random numbers from 1-5, 1-10, 1-15, 1-30 or 1-60 pretty easily.
July 18, 2018 at 15:26 |
R.M. Koske
R.M. Koske
Chris, if you're still following this I'd join the other person who requested in being interested in how you use list / how you put some organization around your more dynamic approach.
Also, what worked well for you about GTD and why'd you stop?
Also, what worked well for you about GTD and why'd you stop?
July 21, 2018 at 15:32 |
Austin
Austin
Everyone of the better systems taught me something, Seraphim described that better in a previous post, if I used it for a prolonged period of time, say, 90 days or so.
Therefore settling on one system forever may also settle a part of the learning process forever.