Discussion Forum > Kindness
Somewhat related, years ago I stopped writing these items as commands. I start each item with the central noun/phrase that quickly tells me what it's about. Sometimes it's not a noun, but it usually is. Also, factual statements are better than commands. Examples:
Car Maintenance light 12 May [reminds me the dash light came on that day]
instead of
Schedule car appt
Furnace filters replace, check stock
instead of
Replace furnace filters, write more on shopping list?
Travel return date, ask R?
or
R? Travel return date
instead of
Call R about travel dates
To me, scanning down the left and picking up the words (Schedule, Replace, Call) does not engage the the intuition like the words (Car, Furnace, Travel). The latter initial words are likely to be unique and are almost always enough to remind me of their whole item. The verbs almost never are, on either count.
Also, several of us have noted that what we initially write as our next action is often not the action we end up needing to take, though it is still a necessary reminder. Putting the noun first focuses on the object of our action, which is much less likely to change. I might think I will "Call R," then later I think I will email her, but instead I end up tacking the question onto a FaceBook Message.
Looking at my first example, logging the fact that my car's maintenance light came on tells me to keep an eye on it, helps me monitor how long it has been if I don't get around to making an appointment right away, and of course also reminds me to make the appointment.
An unintended consequence of noun-first is also to remove the commanding nature, though it's not quite in the direction of kindness. Kindness could be compatible with this.
Car Maintenance light 12 May [reminds me the dash light came on that day]
instead of
Schedule car appt
Furnace filters replace, check stock
instead of
Replace furnace filters, write more on shopping list?
Travel return date, ask R?
or
R? Travel return date
instead of
Call R about travel dates
To me, scanning down the left and picking up the words (Schedule, Replace, Call) does not engage the the intuition like the words (Car, Furnace, Travel). The latter initial words are likely to be unique and are almost always enough to remind me of their whole item. The verbs almost never are, on either count.
Also, several of us have noted that what we initially write as our next action is often not the action we end up needing to take, though it is still a necessary reminder. Putting the noun first focuses on the object of our action, which is much less likely to change. I might think I will "Call R," then later I think I will email her, but instead I end up tacking the question onto a FaceBook Message.
Looking at my first example, logging the fact that my car's maintenance light came on tells me to keep an eye on it, helps me monitor how long it has been if I don't get around to making an appointment right away, and of course also reminds me to make the appointment.
An unintended consequence of noun-first is also to remove the commanding nature, though it's not quite in the direction of kindness. Kindness could be compatible with this.
May 14, 2019 at 4:28 |
Bernie
Bernie
Lenore: What are others' reactions?
I'm not a fan, it feels to me like the tail wagging the dog. I don't think I should be doing-something-or-not because I worded a list in a particular way. I should be doing it because, separately, I've decided that it should be done, I understand the value of it and I'm comfortable with the aspects of my life which relate to it. A list is just a tool, a reminder of all such things today so I can work on them. It shouldn't tell me why I should work on them – the "why" should be the only way they got onto such a list in the first place.
Speaking for myself I found a long time back that if I'm writing stuff on a list and then not doing it, that's because I don't wish to confront something uncomfortable related to it in my life **regardless of the value I see in doing the thing**. It's very easy to convince myself that in order to "fix" this I can make a list force me to do it, by wording the list differently, or maybe trying this new system, or just calling it "resistance", or trying new rules in a bid to somehow take myself out of the loop and let the list "decide" for me what needs to be done. But that turns me into a miserable passive servant of a tyrannical list which is impossible to please and stalks me in my sleep. I don't want that, I want the list to be something that I control by letting it exist only with things which I already know have value, and accepting that I have to tackle those things in my life and about myself which make me want to avoid them.
Beck writes "When checking off an item that begins with “You promised to email Maria…” I feel as though I’m being a person who follows up on her promises. When checking off “Email Maria,” I feel as though I’ve just won another round of whack-a-mole."
Beck is letting her list boss her around and she's playing word games with it to try and alleviate that feeling. Instead, when she gets a sense of wanting to email Maria, she should be thinking about why she wants to email Maria, and perhaps why she doesn't want to email Maria, and what that entails and the value it represents. Then getting it done will release that value into her life regardless of whether it even made it to a list or the wording used. Tasks need to earn their place on a to-do list.
Again, I'm speaking from my own experience and thoughts, not trying to dictate to others.
I'm not a fan, it feels to me like the tail wagging the dog. I don't think I should be doing-something-or-not because I worded a list in a particular way. I should be doing it because, separately, I've decided that it should be done, I understand the value of it and I'm comfortable with the aspects of my life which relate to it. A list is just a tool, a reminder of all such things today so I can work on them. It shouldn't tell me why I should work on them – the "why" should be the only way they got onto such a list in the first place.
Speaking for myself I found a long time back that if I'm writing stuff on a list and then not doing it, that's because I don't wish to confront something uncomfortable related to it in my life **regardless of the value I see in doing the thing**. It's very easy to convince myself that in order to "fix" this I can make a list force me to do it, by wording the list differently, or maybe trying this new system, or just calling it "resistance", or trying new rules in a bid to somehow take myself out of the loop and let the list "decide" for me what needs to be done. But that turns me into a miserable passive servant of a tyrannical list which is impossible to please and stalks me in my sleep. I don't want that, I want the list to be something that I control by letting it exist only with things which I already know have value, and accepting that I have to tackle those things in my life and about myself which make me want to avoid them.
Beck writes "When checking off an item that begins with “You promised to email Maria…” I feel as though I’m being a person who follows up on her promises. When checking off “Email Maria,” I feel as though I’ve just won another round of whack-a-mole."
Beck is letting her list boss her around and she's playing word games with it to try and alleviate that feeling. Instead, when she gets a sense of wanting to email Maria, she should be thinking about why she wants to email Maria, and perhaps why she doesn't want to email Maria, and what that entails and the value it represents. Then getting it done will release that value into her life regardless of whether it even made it to a list or the wording used. Tasks need to earn their place on a to-do list.
Again, I'm speaking from my own experience and thoughts, not trying to dictate to others.
May 14, 2019 at 7:18 |
Chris
Chris
My reaction to this is "Do whatever works for you."
However personally I would much prefer my list to say the clear command:
"Email Maria"
rather than
"You promised to email Maria"
What will it be saying next?
"You promised me you'd tidy your bedroom today."
"You promised me you'd take me out to dinner this weekend."
"You're always promising to do it, but you never do!"
"Why can't you be like other men?"
However personally I would much prefer my list to say the clear command:
"Email Maria"
rather than
"You promised to email Maria"
What will it be saying next?
"You promised me you'd tidy your bedroom today."
"You promised me you'd take me out to dinner this weekend."
"You're always promising to do it, but you never do!"
"Why can't you be like other men?"
May 14, 2019 at 12:41 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
"... Why can't you be like other men?"
Now, THAT is funny!
Now, THAT is funny!
May 14, 2019 at 14:27 |
Bernie
Bernie
Chris, your post resonated with me.
I think a lot of productivity philosophy is based on the belief that we can get unstuck if we just devise the right system, if we implement the right clever trick, if we get the right app.
That's been a dead-end approach for me. I've wasted years of my life, both personally and professionally, switching systems and apps, prioritizing, re-writing tasks, filing and organizing project notes, planning, day-dreaming about productivity, and reading/watching the likes of David Allen and company (not to knock on GTD specifically, but it's been the worst culprit for me).
You can add all the tags, contexts, and metadata to a task, re-word it, find the perfect verb, break it down, file it in the best category or project folder—but if you don't want to do it, deep down, you won't.
Often there's something else blocking you, something psychological. Maybe you don't really want to do it, but like to imagine yourself doing it. Maybe you have too much to do and know it. Maybe you need to examine your core values. Maybe you are distracted, lazy, or depressed. Maybe you are stuck in a rout or vicious cycle. Maybe you're bored. Maybe you resent the person who gave you the task, or don't want to do the task because it involves dealing with someone you don't particularly like.
If you obscure those problems with productivity tips, you'll never confront and expand your own limitations.
"Productivity" as a topic has never improved my productivity. And those who claim otherwise, I suspect, would have been productive anyway as a natural consequence of their personality, habits, and routines, even without exposure to all the millions of bits of advice on productivity floating around the internet.
I suppose what I'm saying is that a good therapy session is probably better for tackling your to-dos than any article about managing your to-do list.
I think a lot of productivity philosophy is based on the belief that we can get unstuck if we just devise the right system, if we implement the right clever trick, if we get the right app.
That's been a dead-end approach for me. I've wasted years of my life, both personally and professionally, switching systems and apps, prioritizing, re-writing tasks, filing and organizing project notes, planning, day-dreaming about productivity, and reading/watching the likes of David Allen and company (not to knock on GTD specifically, but it's been the worst culprit for me).
You can add all the tags, contexts, and metadata to a task, re-word it, find the perfect verb, break it down, file it in the best category or project folder—but if you don't want to do it, deep down, you won't.
Often there's something else blocking you, something psychological. Maybe you don't really want to do it, but like to imagine yourself doing it. Maybe you have too much to do and know it. Maybe you need to examine your core values. Maybe you are distracted, lazy, or depressed. Maybe you are stuck in a rout or vicious cycle. Maybe you're bored. Maybe you resent the person who gave you the task, or don't want to do the task because it involves dealing with someone you don't particularly like.
If you obscure those problems with productivity tips, you'll never confront and expand your own limitations.
"Productivity" as a topic has never improved my productivity. And those who claim otherwise, I suspect, would have been productive anyway as a natural consequence of their personality, habits, and routines, even without exposure to all the millions of bits of advice on productivity floating around the internet.
I suppose what I'm saying is that a good therapy session is probably better for tackling your to-dos than any article about managing your to-do list.
May 14, 2019 at 20:40 |
Jacob
Jacob
I largely agree Jacob. Knowing your work (really knowing, not just listing it) and your why, these are vastly more important than having a perfect time management system. However, your proposal to see a shrink would have done nothing for me 10 years ago when I wad attempting to manage the complexity of business ownership. There was just a ton of things todo and I was forgetting and failing to do it all.
But a good system also won't get you there without properly understanding what matters and choosing to focus on that and to ignore what doesn't. And also the courage to do those things. But also a good process to get them done effectively.
But a good system also won't get you there without properly understanding what matters and choosing to focus on that and to ignore what doesn't. And also the courage to do those things. But also a good process to get them done effectively.
May 14, 2019 at 21:04 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
I'm a man, but I can change, if I have to, I guess. -- Possom Lodge Men's Prayer, The Red Green Show
Sometimes writing things a different way can help us see things differently. It varies.
Forcing myself to think of a possible next action as I write things down, or at least during the next daily review, was a big improvement for me.
Looking at my reading list the way the article recommends, as a list of things Past Self thought I might be interested in, takes away some of the FOMO and makes it easier to delete things unread. (I'm still working on Current Self being a bit more selective when flagging things for FS to read.)
(I think it was Dan Ariely who said that we trust Past Self more than we trust Current Self. If Past Self thought it was a good idea, then Current Self will probably agree.)
Time Management and Therapy have a lot of overlap. Many TM systems have different ways of looking at things, attaching current tasks to longer-term goals, and deciding what is important. If someone's lack of TM skills is getting in the way of their goals, I'd be surprised if a therapist didn't work on that.
Sometimes writing things a different way can help us see things differently. It varies.
Forcing myself to think of a possible next action as I write things down, or at least during the next daily review, was a big improvement for me.
Looking at my reading list the way the article recommends, as a list of things Past Self thought I might be interested in, takes away some of the FOMO and makes it easier to delete things unread. (I'm still working on Current Self being a bit more selective when flagging things for FS to read.)
(I think it was Dan Ariely who said that we trust Past Self more than we trust Current Self. If Past Self thought it was a good idea, then Current Self will probably agree.)
Time Management and Therapy have a lot of overlap. Many TM systems have different ways of looking at things, attaching current tasks to longer-term goals, and deciding what is important. If someone's lack of TM skills is getting in the way of their goals, I'd be surprised if a therapist didn't work on that.
May 14, 2019 at 21:25 |
Cricket
Cricket
I still like starting with verbs, but appreciate the usefulness of added info - date, phone number, name - any little note that fits on the same line and helps me remember "what the heck was this about?" or helps me do the task without having to fetch other info first.
I stopped using "call" or "email" as a verb, though, because it's too specific. I use "contact" instead - when I get to that task, I can choose which method of contact to use as appropriate or convenient. Often it's a call plus text-message or email, as people seldom answer the phone these days, and are even less likely to check and respond to voicemail.
I stopped using "call" or "email" as a verb, though, because it's too specific. I use "contact" instead - when I get to that task, I can choose which method of contact to use as appropriate or convenient. Often it's a call plus text-message or email, as people seldom answer the phone these days, and are even less likely to check and respond to voicemail.
May 14, 2019 at 21:29 |
ubi
ubi
I like what Chris wrote, there is a lot of truth in it, there is always something brutally honest and refreshing about it. But somehow I feel it goes a little too far, or perhaps not far enough, or not deep enough; and rather misses the point about time management systems.
To me, it's never a problem of "Oh look, here is that dreaded task, I have to trick myself into doing it".
Instead it's always something like this:
... "Here is that task, and something about it is bothering me and making me hesitate to get started"
... "Here is that task, but I don't know how to do it, or something is blocking me"
... "Here is that task, but maybe it would be the wrong thing to do, it would have negative consequences, I am not sure I should really do it"
... "Here is that task, but there are other more pressing things to do that are bothering me, maybe I should be doing those things instead"
... etc.
So: there are conflicts, pressures, uncertainties... These create the resistance.
I suppose in the face of these pressures, it can be a relief to have someone (or some faceless mechanism) just tell you what to do. And that can lead to the kind of thing that Chris describes -- a kind of subservience to the list. But I don't think Chris is describing the heart of the matter.
One technique for dealing with the resistance is to ignore it and just power through it. This seems to be Chris' preferred technique. This seems to work for many people very well.
I find that approach constraining and frustrating, because I have a sense that when I am feeling those different kinds of resistance, my intuition is telling me something important. When I have followed that intuition, and tried to sort out what it is saying, it has paid off so well so many times, I tend to want to follow it. When I have ignored it, I have often regretted it.
But on the other hand, sometimes my intuition is just wrong, and I would have been better served to power through it. 🙂
So which is better, listening to the resistance and learning whatever it is trying to tell me, or just saying "enough already" and getting on with things?
The Cynefin model has helped me quite a bit with dealing with that question.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynefin_framework
The answer depends on the relative value of learning vs. completing, given my current context. In Cynefin-chaotic and Cynefin-complex domains, learning is at least as important as getting things done. In Cynefin-complicated (the realm of "best practice") and Cynefin-simple (the realm of the obvious) domains, execution is more important - just get it done - but even there, learning is important, too.
It's interesting how different time management systems approach this problem. Most of them are all about just getting things done. They are focused on reducing or eliminating the resistance somehow. GTD, for example, makes an especially big deal about defining "next actions", so there is always something specific and concrete you can do. This takes away one very common area of resistance.
Mark's systems go deeper. The ones based on the "standing out" principle steer around resistance completely when you are working the list. Not only do I end up getting more done with Mark's methods, but I also *learn* a lot more. It's really helpful to take a step back and look at the things remaining on my list that did NOT stand out - you can learn a lot from what you are resisting. Some of the systems (AF1 comes to mind) systematize that process. Serial No-List works like that as well.
So I don't think the usefulness of time management systems is to trick us into doing the tasks, but to see more clearly what is really happening and how to deal with it all more effectively.
To me, it's never a problem of "Oh look, here is that dreaded task, I have to trick myself into doing it".
Instead it's always something like this:
... "Here is that task, and something about it is bothering me and making me hesitate to get started"
... "Here is that task, but I don't know how to do it, or something is blocking me"
... "Here is that task, but maybe it would be the wrong thing to do, it would have negative consequences, I am not sure I should really do it"
... "Here is that task, but there are other more pressing things to do that are bothering me, maybe I should be doing those things instead"
... etc.
So: there are conflicts, pressures, uncertainties... These create the resistance.
I suppose in the face of these pressures, it can be a relief to have someone (or some faceless mechanism) just tell you what to do. And that can lead to the kind of thing that Chris describes -- a kind of subservience to the list. But I don't think Chris is describing the heart of the matter.
One technique for dealing with the resistance is to ignore it and just power through it. This seems to be Chris' preferred technique. This seems to work for many people very well.
I find that approach constraining and frustrating, because I have a sense that when I am feeling those different kinds of resistance, my intuition is telling me something important. When I have followed that intuition, and tried to sort out what it is saying, it has paid off so well so many times, I tend to want to follow it. When I have ignored it, I have often regretted it.
But on the other hand, sometimes my intuition is just wrong, and I would have been better served to power through it. 🙂
So which is better, listening to the resistance and learning whatever it is trying to tell me, or just saying "enough already" and getting on with things?
The Cynefin model has helped me quite a bit with dealing with that question.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynefin_framework
The answer depends on the relative value of learning vs. completing, given my current context. In Cynefin-chaotic and Cynefin-complex domains, learning is at least as important as getting things done. In Cynefin-complicated (the realm of "best practice") and Cynefin-simple (the realm of the obvious) domains, execution is more important - just get it done - but even there, learning is important, too.
It's interesting how different time management systems approach this problem. Most of them are all about just getting things done. They are focused on reducing or eliminating the resistance somehow. GTD, for example, makes an especially big deal about defining "next actions", so there is always something specific and concrete you can do. This takes away one very common area of resistance.
Mark's systems go deeper. The ones based on the "standing out" principle steer around resistance completely when you are working the list. Not only do I end up getting more done with Mark's methods, but I also *learn* a lot more. It's really helpful to take a step back and look at the things remaining on my list that did NOT stand out - you can learn a lot from what you are resisting. Some of the systems (AF1 comes to mind) systematize that process. Serial No-List works like that as well.
So I don't think the usefulness of time management systems is to trick us into doing the tasks, but to see more clearly what is really happening and how to deal with it all more effectively.
May 15, 2019 at 6:32 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
On the "pantry method" of writing one's tasks... I had a mixed reaction to that article. I could kind of relate to the pantry idea (at least, thinking of times when our pantry is full of all kinds of nice tasty things, like just after the end of Lent, during the Pascha Season, like now!). It's fun to poke around in the pantry and the fridge at a time like this, to linger a bit before choosing, to enjoy the smells and the colors, the anticipation on the children's faces...
But on the other hand, I also had a cynical reaction to the article. I could never bring myself to write my tasks that way. Is it beautifully creative or just ostentatious and overwrought? Either way, it would be exhausting and time consuming and I'd rather spend my creative energies on something less ephemeral than my task lists. To what purpose, all this creative energy?
Hmm, that gave me pause.
Hmm, yes. To what purpose?
This made me think about it a little differently.
Generalizing a bit, perhaps this kind of language is just another way of elucidating the context and motivation for the task?
That *can* be helpful. When I forget the context of my tasks, they just don't "stand out". There isn't any "hook" to pull me in. The intrinsic motivation of the work can fade away.
But what if every task on my list was always written in a way that ...
... is specific, concrete, and immediately actionable, as appropriate to the need
... clearly and immediately conveys the context and purpose of the task
... gives a sense of my highest motivations behind the task, how it connects to my highest aspirations
... does all this evocatively, immediately, and emotionally
?
And what if all the individual tasks were presented to me in such a way that I could understand clearly their relationship to each other, their relative importance to each other and to my ultimate goals and purposes?
And what if all of this were always changing dynamically and automatically, to adjust to my changing contexts and priorities?
Now that would be quite a powerful list, wouldn't it?
It occurred to me that this is what all the "standing out", intuition-driven systems **already do**, at least in principle. The tasks themselves don't generally have all this rich and creative information - they themselves can be rather mundane. But what makes them come alive is our intuitive awareness of their context, value, meaning, and purpose. It's the engagement of our intuition with the list that allows this to happen. And whatever blocks our intuition is what causes the process to malfunction and turn back into a boring (or overwhelming) list of chores and obligations.
So what should we do when we find that our list feels like a boring list of chores and obligations instead of a pantry bursting with fresh and tasty surprises?
Just re-engage the intuition. With most of Mark's systems, that just means doubling down on following the rules; maybe "declaring a backlog" and starting fresh with a new list. With Serial No-List, it just means writing things down a little more, leaning a little more heavily on the list and the process instead of "winging it". Then the intuitive engagement comes back pretty quickly, the flow state returns, the work comes back to life - whether or not you write your tasks in evocative language.
But on the other hand, I also had a cynical reaction to the article. I could never bring myself to write my tasks that way. Is it beautifully creative or just ostentatious and overwrought? Either way, it would be exhausting and time consuming and I'd rather spend my creative energies on something less ephemeral than my task lists. To what purpose, all this creative energy?
Hmm, that gave me pause.
Hmm, yes. To what purpose?
This made me think about it a little differently.
Generalizing a bit, perhaps this kind of language is just another way of elucidating the context and motivation for the task?
That *can* be helpful. When I forget the context of my tasks, they just don't "stand out". There isn't any "hook" to pull me in. The intrinsic motivation of the work can fade away.
But what if every task on my list was always written in a way that ...
... is specific, concrete, and immediately actionable, as appropriate to the need
... clearly and immediately conveys the context and purpose of the task
... gives a sense of my highest motivations behind the task, how it connects to my highest aspirations
... does all this evocatively, immediately, and emotionally
?
And what if all the individual tasks were presented to me in such a way that I could understand clearly their relationship to each other, their relative importance to each other and to my ultimate goals and purposes?
And what if all of this were always changing dynamically and automatically, to adjust to my changing contexts and priorities?
Now that would be quite a powerful list, wouldn't it?
It occurred to me that this is what all the "standing out", intuition-driven systems **already do**, at least in principle. The tasks themselves don't generally have all this rich and creative information - they themselves can be rather mundane. But what makes them come alive is our intuitive awareness of their context, value, meaning, and purpose. It's the engagement of our intuition with the list that allows this to happen. And whatever blocks our intuition is what causes the process to malfunction and turn back into a boring (or overwhelming) list of chores and obligations.
So what should we do when we find that our list feels like a boring list of chores and obligations instead of a pantry bursting with fresh and tasty surprises?
Just re-engage the intuition. With most of Mark's systems, that just means doubling down on following the rules; maybe "declaring a backlog" and starting fresh with a new list. With Serial No-List, it just means writing things down a little more, leaning a little more heavily on the list and the process instead of "winging it". Then the intuitive engagement comes back pretty quickly, the flow state returns, the work comes back to life - whether or not you write your tasks in evocative language.
May 15, 2019 at 7:01 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Jacob: <<"Productivity" as a topic has never improved my productivity. And those who claim otherwise, I suspect, would have been productive anyway>>
In early 2001, I received a very nice grant from Universal Music Canada to run a music studio for at-risk youth (Here's a bit of the project on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4PQf-GYwZw
I was completely overwhelmed with this project, and said so to a friend. He suggested I read Covey's 7 Habits. Almost 20 years later, I still do a weekly review/plan, contemplate my principles and vision and try to put 1st Things 1st. Previous to 7 Habits, my attempts at being productive were a combination of excess guilt and fear leading to action.
<<I suppose what I'm saying is that a good therapy session is probably better for tackling your to-dos than any article about managing your to-do list>>
I've been a practicing therapist for 25 years. I can't think of any modality - CBT included - whereby one session would have much of an impact. Furthermore, I think come combination of placebo mixed with skin-in-the-game i.e. Spending oodles of $$$ via hiring a productivity coach a la David Allen, or Mark Forster, would likely produce short term results vis-a-vis productivity. In fact, I have had a hunch that some of these productivity teachers are productive BECAUSE OF writing/speakin about productivity. The accountability to their methods lies in being a public figure and/or coach to other people. Perhaps the secret (productivity) sauce is writing your own productivity book, and sharing your efforts on a blog or social media.
I'm not sure therapy is something I'd suggest if the sole concern is productivity issues.
My .02
In early 2001, I received a very nice grant from Universal Music Canada to run a music studio for at-risk youth (Here's a bit of the project on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4PQf-GYwZw
I was completely overwhelmed with this project, and said so to a friend. He suggested I read Covey's 7 Habits. Almost 20 years later, I still do a weekly review/plan, contemplate my principles and vision and try to put 1st Things 1st. Previous to 7 Habits, my attempts at being productive were a combination of excess guilt and fear leading to action.
<<I suppose what I'm saying is that a good therapy session is probably better for tackling your to-dos than any article about managing your to-do list>>
I've been a practicing therapist for 25 years. I can't think of any modality - CBT included - whereby one session would have much of an impact. Furthermore, I think come combination of placebo mixed with skin-in-the-game i.e. Spending oodles of $$$ via hiring a productivity coach a la David Allen, or Mark Forster, would likely produce short term results vis-a-vis productivity. In fact, I have had a hunch that some of these productivity teachers are productive BECAUSE OF writing/speakin about productivity. The accountability to their methods lies in being a public figure and/or coach to other people. Perhaps the secret (productivity) sauce is writing your own productivity book, and sharing your efforts on a blog or social media.
I'm not sure therapy is something I'd suggest if the sole concern is productivity issues.
My .02
May 15, 2019 at 15:01 |
avrum
avrum
Interesting discussion.
What I have generally said over the years is that is really doesn't matter much how one phrases a task or what level one sets it at.
The two most important things are:
1. That it takes as short as time as possible to read/write, which allows for fast scanning and rewriting, e.g. "Email Maria".
2. However that's no use if you can't remember which Maria you are supposed to be emailing and what about. So, if you need to (and only if you need to), you can expand it to "Email Maria G. re Insurance".
Added to that I make liberal use of the question mark, e.g. "Email Maria?", which means something like "Should I email Maria now, or has the problem already been settled or does it need further research, etc.?"
What I have generally said over the years is that is really doesn't matter much how one phrases a task or what level one sets it at.
The two most important things are:
1. That it takes as short as time as possible to read/write, which allows for fast scanning and rewriting, e.g. "Email Maria".
2. However that's no use if you can't remember which Maria you are supposed to be emailing and what about. So, if you need to (and only if you need to), you can expand it to "Email Maria G. re Insurance".
Added to that I make liberal use of the question mark, e.g. "Email Maria?", which means something like "Should I email Maria now, or has the problem already been settled or does it need further research, etc.?"
May 15, 2019 at 19:41 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Another use of the question mark basically means "Think about", e.g.
"Marketing?"
This is the signal to start a list of ideas about marketing which one adds to over a period of days or weeks. This is a very good way of stimulating one's thinking about a subject and naturally leads to action.
"Marketing?"
This is the signal to start a list of ideas about marketing which one adds to over a period of days or weeks. This is a very good way of stimulating one's thinking about a subject and naturally leads to action.
May 15, 2019 at 20:05 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Many of my time management methods are ways of dealing with a long list of tasks, possible actions, planning, thinking and new initiatives. Generally they deal with them by recursively scanning the list.
The effect of repeated scanning of a list like this is to either decrease or increase the amount of resistance to each individual item. Decreasing the resistance will normally lead to the task being actioned, while increasing the resistance can lead to the realization that the task needs further thought, a new approach, or abandonment.
The effect of repeated scanning of a list like this is to either decrease or increase the amount of resistance to each individual item. Decreasing the resistance will normally lead to the task being actioned, while increasing the resistance can lead to the realization that the task needs further thought, a new approach, or abandonment.
May 15, 2019 at 20:10 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Jacob: Thank for that, and your post describes my own experience with this subject over the last few decades.
Seraphim: I think we're at crossed purposes as I'm not talking about the things you are, I was giving thoughts on the article's idea of wording tasks on a to-do list to somehow make the person feel creative and optimistic for doing them. My take is that the to-do list's very simple job is to present you with things you've already decided have value and it's that value which will elicit any positive feelings that there are to be had. If someone needs to write tasks in a particular way to feel any worth in doing them they're wasting their life on stuff that doesn't mean anything.
You wrote, "One technique for dealing with the resistance is to ignore it and just power through it. This seems to be Chris' preferred technique". If I feel aversion to something I need to do then I need to work it out more. Once that's done then the relevant things might go on a list, if at all. I have a few text lists including my calendar, and in general stuff ends up in there when I'm ready to do it and know why I'm doing it. The wording on the list is completely irrelevant to how doing it will make me feel and I generally keep it as concise as possible. I don't "power through" things to somehow make resistance go away, I generally work out what matters before I have stuff going on a list in the first place. Once it's clear, whether it's on a list or not, I already know why I'm doing it and getting it started and finished is quite easy, and the only thing that will get it done.
avrum: Jacob was alluding to the point I made about using a personal producitivity system as a proxy for doing what has value, and he described the experience of jumping from one system to another looking for 'The One', and, of course, never finding it or ending up a slave to the to-do list. The reference to therapy was related to putting one's life in order and fixing the various ways we self-sabotage. Looking inward objectively is a hard thing to do.
Seraphim: I think we're at crossed purposes as I'm not talking about the things you are, I was giving thoughts on the article's idea of wording tasks on a to-do list to somehow make the person feel creative and optimistic for doing them. My take is that the to-do list's very simple job is to present you with things you've already decided have value and it's that value which will elicit any positive feelings that there are to be had. If someone needs to write tasks in a particular way to feel any worth in doing them they're wasting their life on stuff that doesn't mean anything.
You wrote, "One technique for dealing with the resistance is to ignore it and just power through it. This seems to be Chris' preferred technique". If I feel aversion to something I need to do then I need to work it out more. Once that's done then the relevant things might go on a list, if at all. I have a few text lists including my calendar, and in general stuff ends up in there when I'm ready to do it and know why I'm doing it. The wording on the list is completely irrelevant to how doing it will make me feel and I generally keep it as concise as possible. I don't "power through" things to somehow make resistance go away, I generally work out what matters before I have stuff going on a list in the first place. Once it's clear, whether it's on a list or not, I already know why I'm doing it and getting it started and finished is quite easy, and the only thing that will get it done.
avrum: Jacob was alluding to the point I made about using a personal producitivity system as a proxy for doing what has value, and he described the experience of jumping from one system to another looking for 'The One', and, of course, never finding it or ending up a slave to the to-do list. The reference to therapy was related to putting one's life in order and fixing the various ways we self-sabotage. Looking inward objectively is a hard thing to do.
May 16, 2019 at 5:51 |
Chris
Chris
Chris:
<< avrum: Jacob was alluding...>>
Thanks for context.
<< avrum: Jacob was alluding...>>
Thanks for context.
May 16, 2019 at 11:29 |
avrum
avrum
Chris:
<<The reference to therapy was related to putting one's life in order and fixing the various ways we self-sabotage. Looking inward objectively is a hard thing to do.>>
Chris, your paraphrasing of my first post is on point.
I'll elaborate a little more.
If someone is generally happy and fulfilled, but has an occasional habit of forgetting deadlines or feeling a bit disorganized on projects, then a productivity solution is probably the right one.
What I was discussing, however, is a crippling hesitation or uncertainty, which causes one to spin their wheels for years and never move forward on any personal or professional growth. A lot of people stuck in that situation fruitlessly search for a productivity system to fix everything. I know because that's been me. Sadly, much of the productivity industry feeds on that addiction, hence the never-ending publication of bestselling books that essentially detail the same stuff.
Therapy might not help. Certainly not a single session. I’m in agreement with avrum there. But I think therapy offers more hope than books about the power of habits, atomic habits, mini habits, or whatever the buzzwords will be in the next one—at least for those stuck in a situation like described above.
In my own case, fidgeting with the “metadata” of a productivity system, or letting productivity be an end in-and-of-itself, is a path to endless frustration and pseudo-work.
Mark's systems are simpler, more intuitive, and more pen-and-paper friendly than the alternatives, which is why I've been a follower of Mark's posts and this forum for a number of years. But even with simple systems, there's a strong tendency to split hairs and over-analyze. Or worse—constantly switch systems, so that searching and comparing and fine-tuning systems becomes a large portion of one's workday, rather than actual work.
<<The reference to therapy was related to putting one's life in order and fixing the various ways we self-sabotage. Looking inward objectively is a hard thing to do.>>
Chris, your paraphrasing of my first post is on point.
I'll elaborate a little more.
If someone is generally happy and fulfilled, but has an occasional habit of forgetting deadlines or feeling a bit disorganized on projects, then a productivity solution is probably the right one.
What I was discussing, however, is a crippling hesitation or uncertainty, which causes one to spin their wheels for years and never move forward on any personal or professional growth. A lot of people stuck in that situation fruitlessly search for a productivity system to fix everything. I know because that's been me. Sadly, much of the productivity industry feeds on that addiction, hence the never-ending publication of bestselling books that essentially detail the same stuff.
Therapy might not help. Certainly not a single session. I’m in agreement with avrum there. But I think therapy offers more hope than books about the power of habits, atomic habits, mini habits, or whatever the buzzwords will be in the next one—at least for those stuck in a situation like described above.
In my own case, fidgeting with the “metadata” of a productivity system, or letting productivity be an end in-and-of-itself, is a path to endless frustration and pseudo-work.
Mark's systems are simpler, more intuitive, and more pen-and-paper friendly than the alternatives, which is why I've been a follower of Mark's posts and this forum for a number of years. But even with simple systems, there's a strong tendency to split hairs and over-analyze. Or worse—constantly switch systems, so that searching and comparing and fine-tuning systems becomes a large portion of one's workday, rather than actual work.
May 16, 2019 at 22:53 |
Jacob
Jacob
Jacob:
I too have experienced what you described - system overload etc.
During the Lenten challenge, I sorted all my work into batches as I had quite a backlog at the time. That was great as loads of efficiency and I have now cleared more or less everything.
Now there is no need for that system and I have found success with what I can only really describe as a "no system".
It is simply doing all my tasks the first time I see them e.g. point me in front of the email and just work straight through the most recent first ones first. No deferring, no lists, no prioritising etc. I think about what needs to be done and just do it there and then.
My theory is that when I think too much about all the other tasks and review them over and over, a sort of resistance and anxiety builds up for me. I am distracted thinking about other tasks that might be more important. I would rather not know!
Also, for me it is quite important to do the newest first. That is because it follows Mark's do it tomorrow principles - my favourite - if I can complete all the latest tasks each day, then there is also time to eat into any backlogs and it gives me immediate feedback if I'm keeping up with all the work coming in.
As there is zero admin time with this I feel it is very efficient as I am more or less working on tasks all the time.
Also finally, there are times when I hit a task and feel like not doing it at that time - usually for no good reason at all. That can be the sticking point and for me it is actually very hard to keep going. But with lots of determination working straight through any task becomes a habit and much easier with practice.
At the end of the day success (for me) is really to be able to do every task without any resistance whatsoever the first time I see it.
I too have experienced what you described - system overload etc.
During the Lenten challenge, I sorted all my work into batches as I had quite a backlog at the time. That was great as loads of efficiency and I have now cleared more or less everything.
Now there is no need for that system and I have found success with what I can only really describe as a "no system".
It is simply doing all my tasks the first time I see them e.g. point me in front of the email and just work straight through the most recent first ones first. No deferring, no lists, no prioritising etc. I think about what needs to be done and just do it there and then.
My theory is that when I think too much about all the other tasks and review them over and over, a sort of resistance and anxiety builds up for me. I am distracted thinking about other tasks that might be more important. I would rather not know!
Also, for me it is quite important to do the newest first. That is because it follows Mark's do it tomorrow principles - my favourite - if I can complete all the latest tasks each day, then there is also time to eat into any backlogs and it gives me immediate feedback if I'm keeping up with all the work coming in.
As there is zero admin time with this I feel it is very efficient as I am more or less working on tasks all the time.
Also finally, there are times when I hit a task and feel like not doing it at that time - usually for no good reason at all. That can be the sticking point and for me it is actually very hard to keep going. But with lots of determination working straight through any task becomes a habit and much easier with practice.
At the end of the day success (for me) is really to be able to do every task without any resistance whatsoever the first time I see it.
May 17, 2019 at 10:05 |
MrBacklog
MrBacklog
MrBacklog:
<<Also, for me it is quite important to do the newest first. >>
Or as a friend of mine used to say many years ago:
"If you do the newest emails first only half your correspondents think you're an idiot. If you do the oldest first, they all do."
<<Also, for me it is quite important to do the newest first. >>
Or as a friend of mine used to say many years ago:
"If you do the newest emails first only half your correspondents think you're an idiot. If you do the oldest first, they all do."
May 17, 2019 at 12:05 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark:
Nice one!
Yes, I think doing the newest only works well if it is possible to keep reasonable up to date.
If there is too much of a backlog then things can go wrong with the oldest getting really old/things missed etc.
I suppose if the backlog does get a bit large, then not too much trouble to do a bit of simple scanning and move any urgent items to the more recent area.
Another benefit of dealing with newest first is I don't get any chasers which stops timewasting.
Actually being up to date is really efficient. Backlogs are a problem and I think they can slow someone down quite a lot just having to manage it all.
Only thing about working the way I described above is that I feel like I'm working on checkout till in a supermarket....not such a bad thing and certainly stress free at the moment.
Nice one!
Yes, I think doing the newest only works well if it is possible to keep reasonable up to date.
If there is too much of a backlog then things can go wrong with the oldest getting really old/things missed etc.
I suppose if the backlog does get a bit large, then not too much trouble to do a bit of simple scanning and move any urgent items to the more recent area.
Another benefit of dealing with newest first is I don't get any chasers which stops timewasting.
Actually being up to date is really efficient. Backlogs are a problem and I think they can slow someone down quite a lot just having to manage it all.
Only thing about working the way I described above is that I feel like I'm working on checkout till in a supermarket....not such a bad thing and certainly stress free at the moment.
May 17, 2019 at 13:11 |
MrBacklog
MrBacklog
Jacob <<I think therapy offers more hope than books about the power of habits, atomic habits, mini habits, or whatever the buzzwords will be in the next one—at least for those stuck in a situation like described above.>>
I disagree in this case. There are always fads and what-not, but the current fad about incremental habit building is not a fad at all. It is nothing other than implementing the theory of successful behavioral modification. What a therapist will do in-session is often the same thing as Fogg prescribes in his booklet, or these others. You solve your aversion to doing a task by approaching it in small but progressive increments - little and often - same as you would tackle any phobia. And bigger problems are solved by planning an approach then starting on a very small piece.
Therapists are still valuable they will help you figure your things out, but in the end you with help or without simply have to face your issue and move forward.
I disagree in this case. There are always fads and what-not, but the current fad about incremental habit building is not a fad at all. It is nothing other than implementing the theory of successful behavioral modification. What a therapist will do in-session is often the same thing as Fogg prescribes in his booklet, or these others. You solve your aversion to doing a task by approaching it in small but progressive increments - little and often - same as you would tackle any phobia. And bigger problems are solved by planning an approach then starting on a very small piece.
Therapists are still valuable they will help you figure your things out, but in the end you with help or without simply have to face your issue and move forward.
May 17, 2019 at 21:53 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
I'm in the same camp as Jacob. If nothing interests you, then therapy or medicine, often both, can often help.
Without sufficient dopamine in the right places (not just blood, but enough receptors to get it into the right cells), people don't anticipate feeling better when a project is done. Without sufficient serotonin in the right places, people don't enjoy the moment.
Therapy can help if thinking patterns are a problem. Is what you're doing actually useful, or what you were told to do? Does it trigger anxiety? If so, from what, and how can you best deal with it.
Sometimes, yes, it boils down to just powering through it, but that uses energy up quickly.
Without sufficient dopamine in the right places (not just blood, but enough receptors to get it into the right cells), people don't anticipate feeling better when a project is done. Without sufficient serotonin in the right places, people don't enjoy the moment.
Therapy can help if thinking patterns are a problem. Is what you're doing actually useful, or what you were told to do? Does it trigger anxiety? If so, from what, and how can you best deal with it.
Sometimes, yes, it boils down to just powering through it, but that uses energy up quickly.
May 22, 2019 at 19:30 |
Cricket
Cricket
To clarify, when I say face the issue and move forward, I did not mean powering through it. This is in the context of Fogg's book, and means developing a strategy to gradually get there.
May 22, 2019 at 19:37 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
To me this is a reminder that there is the broader issue of pausing to check your attitude to your list.
I suspect many people use lists and calendars for other peoples benefit too much, forgetting to be a friend to themselves. A good list / schedule takes you towards what you value and towards a vision for you and the way you wish to live. If a vision and values aren't clear of course then a list can be filled with arbitrary tasks, duties, obligations which benefit others more than oneself. This is NOT to say that there should be NO obligations and responsibilties to others.
I suspect many people use lists and calendars for other peoples benefit too much, forgetting to be a friend to themselves. A good list / schedule takes you towards what you value and towards a vision for you and the way you wish to live. If a vision and values aren't clear of course then a list can be filled with arbitrary tasks, duties, obligations which benefit others more than oneself. This is NOT to say that there should be NO obligations and responsibilties to others.
May 24, 2019 at 16:49 |
michael
michael
Chris,
<< Seraphim: I think we're at crossed purposes as I'm not talking about the things you are, I was giving thoughts on the article's idea of wording tasks on a to-do list to somehow make the person feel creative and optimistic for doing them. My take is that the to-do list's very simple job is to present you with things you've already decided have value and it's that value which will elicit any positive feelings that there are to be had. >>
I don't think everyone shares your opinion that this is the only legitimate use of a task list. Most of Mark's methods don't just capture "things you've already decided have value" but rather all kinds of things that may or may not have value. And one of the main purposes of the list-processing methods like Simple Scanning, FVP, AF1, etc., is to help a person get clear about the value of the tasks.
I have always found it useful to look at my lists as more of a thinking tool than just a to-do list. Maybe it's the nature of my work, where 80% of the stuff coming my way, it's not really clear at first whether it needs to be done at all, or where the value really is. Some of it is critical, some of it isn't, and it's not always so easy to tell the difference. So it needs some processing and distillation. I am sure you have at least some of that kind of work, but you seem to do this processing "off list". (You wrote: "If I feel aversion to something I need to do then I need to work it out more. Once that's done then the relevant things might go on a list, if at all.") And that's fine. But that does't mean the rest of us have to adopt your narrow definition of the purpose of a task list. I really like this feature of Mark's systems that a lot of the process of clarifying my thinking and overcoming resistance is built right into the process of working through my tasks.
I personally don't find a lot of value in the approach described by the article that Lenore posted. But at the same time, I just don't agree with the blanket statement that people who use an approach like to help discover the meaning in their work are "wasting their life on stuff that doesn't mean anything" or have become a "miserable passive servant of a tyrannical list which is impossible to please and stalks me in my sleep". Maybe for some people, this approach can be an effective tool to help connect whatever they are doing to their deeper creativity and values. Maybe that's important for their kind of work.
<< Seraphim: I think we're at crossed purposes as I'm not talking about the things you are, I was giving thoughts on the article's idea of wording tasks on a to-do list to somehow make the person feel creative and optimistic for doing them. My take is that the to-do list's very simple job is to present you with things you've already decided have value and it's that value which will elicit any positive feelings that there are to be had. >>
I don't think everyone shares your opinion that this is the only legitimate use of a task list. Most of Mark's methods don't just capture "things you've already decided have value" but rather all kinds of things that may or may not have value. And one of the main purposes of the list-processing methods like Simple Scanning, FVP, AF1, etc., is to help a person get clear about the value of the tasks.
I have always found it useful to look at my lists as more of a thinking tool than just a to-do list. Maybe it's the nature of my work, where 80% of the stuff coming my way, it's not really clear at first whether it needs to be done at all, or where the value really is. Some of it is critical, some of it isn't, and it's not always so easy to tell the difference. So it needs some processing and distillation. I am sure you have at least some of that kind of work, but you seem to do this processing "off list". (You wrote: "If I feel aversion to something I need to do then I need to work it out more. Once that's done then the relevant things might go on a list, if at all.") And that's fine. But that does't mean the rest of us have to adopt your narrow definition of the purpose of a task list. I really like this feature of Mark's systems that a lot of the process of clarifying my thinking and overcoming resistance is built right into the process of working through my tasks.
I personally don't find a lot of value in the approach described by the article that Lenore posted. But at the same time, I just don't agree with the blanket statement that people who use an approach like to help discover the meaning in their work are "wasting their life on stuff that doesn't mean anything" or have become a "miserable passive servant of a tyrannical list which is impossible to please and stalks me in my sleep". Maybe for some people, this approach can be an effective tool to help connect whatever they are doing to their deeper creativity and values. Maybe that's important for their kind of work.
May 27, 2019 at 6:01 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Jacob wrote:
<< "Productivity" as a topic has never improved my productivity. And those who claim otherwise, I suspect, would have been productive anyway as a natural consequence of their personality, habits, and routines, even without exposure to all the millions of bits of advice on productivity floating around the internet >>
You may be right in some cases, but I can think of many counter-examples. For myself, I can think of many specific occasions where my productivity increased dramatically as a result specifically of thinking about, reading about, and focusing on trying to increase my productivity.
Covey's books on the Seven Habits and First Things First helped me realize ways I was self-sabotaging without realizing it and helped me be more pro-active and set me on the road to try to actively improve how I got things done in a systemic way.
GTD and DIT helped me get organized, and probably at least doubled my basic productivity -- in terms of output -- especially DIT.
Autofocus (AF1) taught me how incredibly valuable it is to rely on one's intuition and helped break longstanding logjams of resistance. After a year or two of AF1 and related systems, I think I had at least a 10x increase in productivity, both in terms of raw output (due to greater focus, less resistance and procrastination, and better flow) and in terms of better focus on the right things (dropping things of lower value, faster discovery and focused attention on the things of higher value).
I had another huge jump in productivity with FVP and No-List where I just started flying in terms of output and responsiveness in extremely chaotic situations. FVP gave a very ordered and methodical way to stay on top of the latest changes in a chaotic situation, and then fall back to other priorities when the chaos settled down. No-List created a sense of engagement and focus with my work that I had never experienced before. These things led directly to a promotion at work, then a new job position with broader responsibility, as well as some very positive improvements in our home life.
Theory of Constraints led to another series of conceptual breakthroughs that helped me systematize a lot of these things in my own mind and see how they all connected to each other. This led to Serial No-List and some other ideas that I've been exploring lately, that have made all of the previous improvements come together into a more solid whole, something easily maintained and sustainable, without the sense of frenetic activity and burnout that I would sometimes get from No-List.
I also gleaned many concepts from Lean/TPS, Agile, Kanban, and other work methods, and applied them to my own personal productivity. They have all helped in one way or another.
I'm sure there are many others here who have similar stories. Melanie Wilson wrote a book about her experiences, a lot of which started here with Autofocus.
<< "Productivity" as a topic has never improved my productivity. And those who claim otherwise, I suspect, would have been productive anyway as a natural consequence of their personality, habits, and routines, even without exposure to all the millions of bits of advice on productivity floating around the internet >>
You may be right in some cases, but I can think of many counter-examples. For myself, I can think of many specific occasions where my productivity increased dramatically as a result specifically of thinking about, reading about, and focusing on trying to increase my productivity.
Covey's books on the Seven Habits and First Things First helped me realize ways I was self-sabotaging without realizing it and helped me be more pro-active and set me on the road to try to actively improve how I got things done in a systemic way.
GTD and DIT helped me get organized, and probably at least doubled my basic productivity -- in terms of output -- especially DIT.
Autofocus (AF1) taught me how incredibly valuable it is to rely on one's intuition and helped break longstanding logjams of resistance. After a year or two of AF1 and related systems, I think I had at least a 10x increase in productivity, both in terms of raw output (due to greater focus, less resistance and procrastination, and better flow) and in terms of better focus on the right things (dropping things of lower value, faster discovery and focused attention on the things of higher value).
I had another huge jump in productivity with FVP and No-List where I just started flying in terms of output and responsiveness in extremely chaotic situations. FVP gave a very ordered and methodical way to stay on top of the latest changes in a chaotic situation, and then fall back to other priorities when the chaos settled down. No-List created a sense of engagement and focus with my work that I had never experienced before. These things led directly to a promotion at work, then a new job position with broader responsibility, as well as some very positive improvements in our home life.
Theory of Constraints led to another series of conceptual breakthroughs that helped me systematize a lot of these things in my own mind and see how they all connected to each other. This led to Serial No-List and some other ideas that I've been exploring lately, that have made all of the previous improvements come together into a more solid whole, something easily maintained and sustainable, without the sense of frenetic activity and burnout that I would sometimes get from No-List.
I also gleaned many concepts from Lean/TPS, Agile, Kanban, and other work methods, and applied them to my own personal productivity. They have all helped in one way or another.
I'm sure there are many others here who have similar stories. Melanie Wilson wrote a book about her experiences, a lot of which started here with Autofocus.
May 27, 2019 at 6:26 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
MrBacklog -
<< Now there is no need for that system and I have found success with what I can only really describe as a "no system". It is simply doing all my tasks the first time I see them e.g. point me in front of the email and just work straight through the most recent first ones first. No deferring, no lists, no prioritising etc. I think about what needs to be done and just do it there and then. >>
I wrote a presentation along these lines about a year ago, but can't find it right now. Basically it's single-tasking, which gives you 100% focus on 1 task, all the time, which not only eliminates all the distraction and overhead of prioritization, etc., but also increases throughput. But there are so many obstacles and prerequisites to make it happen.
Here are some of the simple ones:
- Interruptions
- Current task is blocked (tool or resource is missing, etc.)
- New task arrives that is higher priority than current task
Here are some harder ones:
- There is more work than you can possibly do
- There are many interdependencies with your work and that of other people, not all of it clear at the start
- General direction (and maybe deadline) is clear but specific tasks (and time required) are not
How do you overcome these? Or do you not have these kinds of obstacles?
<< Now there is no need for that system and I have found success with what I can only really describe as a "no system". It is simply doing all my tasks the first time I see them e.g. point me in front of the email and just work straight through the most recent first ones first. No deferring, no lists, no prioritising etc. I think about what needs to be done and just do it there and then. >>
I wrote a presentation along these lines about a year ago, but can't find it right now. Basically it's single-tasking, which gives you 100% focus on 1 task, all the time, which not only eliminates all the distraction and overhead of prioritization, etc., but also increases throughput. But there are so many obstacles and prerequisites to make it happen.
Here are some of the simple ones:
- Interruptions
- Current task is blocked (tool or resource is missing, etc.)
- New task arrives that is higher priority than current task
Here are some harder ones:
- There is more work than you can possibly do
- There are many interdependencies with your work and that of other people, not all of it clear at the start
- General direction (and maybe deadline) is clear but specific tasks (and time required) are not
How do you overcome these? Or do you not have these kinds of obstacles?
May 27, 2019 at 6:37 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Lenore,
Did you end up giving the method in the article a try? How did it turn out?
Did you end up giving the method in the article a try? How did it turn out?
May 27, 2019 at 6:41 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Seraphim:-
- Current task is blocked (tool or resource is missing, etc.)
I have a simple task carry forward system to handle this. I consider any task “done” when it is progressed as far as possible.
- New task arrives that is higher priority than current task
I don’t worry too much about that as it works ok as It gets done the next day as it will be in all the other new tasks coming in.
Here are some harder ones:
- There is more work than you can possibly do
No system can actually solve this problem. Only solution is to reduce commitments.
- There are many interdependencies with your work and that of other people, not all of it clear at the start.
Task carry forward system seems to handle this. Often a task becomes multiple tasks.
- General direction (and maybe deadline) is clear but specific tasks (and time required) are not.
I suppose the next task becomes clearer as it progresses.
Actually the main problem with all of the is some tasks getting too old when I simply can’t get through all the new tasks. But my theory is that eventually being 100% efficient in the long run will get everything done and one day I will have a zero inbox. I like the direction this gives and I don’t have to think about anything at all other than doing the tasks.
- Current task is blocked (tool or resource is missing, etc.)
I have a simple task carry forward system to handle this. I consider any task “done” when it is progressed as far as possible.
- New task arrives that is higher priority than current task
I don’t worry too much about that as it works ok as It gets done the next day as it will be in all the other new tasks coming in.
Here are some harder ones:
- There is more work than you can possibly do
No system can actually solve this problem. Only solution is to reduce commitments.
- There are many interdependencies with your work and that of other people, not all of it clear at the start.
Task carry forward system seems to handle this. Often a task becomes multiple tasks.
- General direction (and maybe deadline) is clear but specific tasks (and time required) are not.
I suppose the next task becomes clearer as it progresses.
Actually the main problem with all of the is some tasks getting too old when I simply can’t get through all the new tasks. But my theory is that eventually being 100% efficient in the long run will get everything done and one day I will have a zero inbox. I like the direction this gives and I don’t have to think about anything at all other than doing the tasks.
May 27, 2019 at 8:09 |
MrBacklog
MrBacklog
Seraphim:
<<Melanie Wilson wrote a book about her experiences, a lot of which started here with Autofocus.
>>
Now there's a blast from the past. Based on your update, I purchased her book. She seems to be active on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/psychowith6/
<<Melanie Wilson wrote a book about her experiences, a lot of which started here with Autofocus.
>>
Now there's a blast from the past. Based on your update, I purchased her book. She seems to be active on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/psychowith6/
May 27, 2019 at 13:17 |
avrum
avrum
avrum:
Thanks for the mention of Melanie and Instagram. Reading the posts it appears that her husband recently had a minor stroke. I'm sure all expressions of good will and/or prayers would be appreciated.
Thanks for the mention of Melanie and Instagram. Reading the posts it appears that her husband recently had a minor stroke. I'm sure all expressions of good will and/or prayers would be appreciated.
May 28, 2019 at 0:17 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Marks - yes, I saw that.
Melanie, I don't know if you're reading this boards, but wishing your husband a refua shlema (speedy and full recovery).
Melanie, I don't know if you're reading this boards, but wishing your husband a refua shlema (speedy and full recovery).
May 28, 2019 at 0:44 |
avrum
avrum
Seraphim, thank you for letting me know about this thread. We are so thankful that my husband's stroke was minor. He is still waiting on return of full sensation on his right side, but it hasn't kept him from doing all the sports he loves.
I have been surprised by the interest homeschoolers have had in my productivity book. I haven't been marketing it outside of that niche.
Mark, I hope your health is good and Avrum, I'd be glad to hear how you're doing. :-)
I have been surprised by the interest homeschoolers have had in my productivity book. I haven't been marketing it outside of that niche.
Mark, I hope your health is good and Avrum, I'd be glad to hear how you're doing. :-)
May 28, 2019 at 2:39 |
Melanie Wilson
Melanie Wilson
Seraphim: "I don't think everyone shares your opinion that this is the only legitimate use of a task list."
That is not my opinon of a task list at all. I was commenting in the context of Beck's approach to her to-do list since she herself talks about feeling that her list has turned into her computer commanding her to do things.
"Most of Mark's methods..."
I am giving my reaction to the article posted, as requested, nothing to do with Mark's methods.
You're reacting to my post in the context of your work environment, but I am making that post in the context of Beck's feeling that her list is pushing her around. Her example gives a somewhat tame looking list with a timescale of one week and I'm commenting on that, not on your work environment which sounds very different to hers.
I also work in a very busy environment and there I use the various tools that have been standardised on (eg Outlook, calendar, Yammer, G Suite, in-house web apps, etc) and I use a hardback A4 book to take event and meeting notes and a task list of what I'm doing which is very changeable, with short things mixed with multi-day proposals, solution design and project management and interruptions throughout the day.
Consider my comments to be in the context of a person who feels bossed around by their more general life list. Could this idea of kindness work to fix that? My take - no, I don't think so, I'm not a fan and my original post explains why.
That is not my opinon of a task list at all. I was commenting in the context of Beck's approach to her to-do list since she herself talks about feeling that her list has turned into her computer commanding her to do things.
"Most of Mark's methods..."
I am giving my reaction to the article posted, as requested, nothing to do with Mark's methods.
You're reacting to my post in the context of your work environment, but I am making that post in the context of Beck's feeling that her list is pushing her around. Her example gives a somewhat tame looking list with a timescale of one week and I'm commenting on that, not on your work environment which sounds very different to hers.
I also work in a very busy environment and there I use the various tools that have been standardised on (eg Outlook, calendar, Yammer, G Suite, in-house web apps, etc) and I use a hardback A4 book to take event and meeting notes and a task list of what I'm doing which is very changeable, with short things mixed with multi-day proposals, solution design and project management and interruptions throughout the day.
Consider my comments to be in the context of a person who feels bossed around by their more general life list. Could this idea of kindness work to fix that? My take - no, I don't think so, I'm not a fan and my original post explains why.
May 28, 2019 at 3:17 |
Chris
Chris
Chris - thank you for clarifying the context, and I apologize if I misrepresented you.
May 28, 2019 at 21:50 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
I appreciate you posting that, thankyou.
May 28, 2019 at 22:45 |
Chris
Chris
http://www.becktench.com/blog/2019/5/13/kinder-to-do-lists
I think I would really resonate with tasks worded in this way and plan to try it out. What are others' reactions?