Discussion Forum > Serial No-List - The Rules
Here is a variant that is almost equivalent, but does not depend so much on page breaks.
For anyone who likes using up all the white space in a notebook, this might work better.
If you like being able to focus only on Today's tasks, and hiding away the older tasks, the original rules above might work better.
There isn't a lot of difference.
1. At the beginning of each day, draw a heavy line and date it. Everything below the line is your Today List.
2. Everything previous to the line is the Closed List.
3. Start the day by writing everything on your mind that needs to be done on the Today List.
4. Cycle through the Today List repeatedly, working on whatever stands out.
5. Re-enter unfinished tasks on the Today List.
6. As new tasks come up during the day, add them to the Today List.
7. When nothing on the Today List stands out, do one scan through the Closed List in reverse order (most recent tasks first), working on whatever stands out.
8. After you complete one scan through the Closed List, you then come back to the Today List, and repeat from (4.)
For anyone who likes using up all the white space in a notebook, this might work better.
If you like being able to focus only on Today's tasks, and hiding away the older tasks, the original rules above might work better.
There isn't a lot of difference.
1. At the beginning of each day, draw a heavy line and date it. Everything below the line is your Today List.
2. Everything previous to the line is the Closed List.
3. Start the day by writing everything on your mind that needs to be done on the Today List.
4. Cycle through the Today List repeatedly, working on whatever stands out.
5. Re-enter unfinished tasks on the Today List.
6. As new tasks come up during the day, add them to the Today List.
7. When nothing on the Today List stands out, do one scan through the Closed List in reverse order (most recent tasks first), working on whatever stands out.
8. After you complete one scan through the Closed List, you then come back to the Today List, and repeat from (4.)
July 27, 2019 at 1:24 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
What is the reason to start on the left-hand page; is the idea that today's tasks may take up more than 1 page depending on the number of lines in the notebook?
Why cross out tasks that you stop working on, instead of crossing them out when they are completed?
Why cross out tasks that you stop working on, instead of crossing them out when they are completed?
October 8, 2019 at 3:44 |
Zeloc
Zeloc
Found the answer in this post by Mark on simple scanning:
Mike:
<< Why cross out and re-enter each task every time it is addressed? >>
There are several reasons why I prefer to re-enter. The most important is that it allows "clumping", which is when tasks which get done together get grouped together. You may be able to see how often tasks have been done with dotting, but you don't get a feel for what order they have been done in.
Another important thing re-entering enables happens when you are working on several large tasks. Each time they get re-entered fewer and fewer other tasks surround them at the end of the list. So you can get two or three task being worked on over and over again without distraction from the other tasks on the list.
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2017/12/2/simple-scanning-the-rules.html
Mike:
<< Why cross out and re-enter each task every time it is addressed? >>
There are several reasons why I prefer to re-enter. The most important is that it allows "clumping", which is when tasks which get done together get grouped together. You may be able to see how often tasks have been done with dotting, but you don't get a feel for what order they have been done in.
Another important thing re-entering enables happens when you are working on several large tasks. Each time they get re-entered fewer and fewer other tasks surround them at the end of the list. So you can get two or three task being worked on over and over again without distraction from the other tasks on the list.
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2017/12/2/simple-scanning-the-rules.html
October 8, 2019 at 5:42 |
Zeloc
Zeloc
Zeloc -
<< What is the reason to start on the left-hand page; is the idea that today's tasks may take up more than 1 page depending on the number of lines in the notebook? >>
Yes, that is one reason, although it doesn't happen very often (to me at least) that today's tasks take up more than 1 page in my 30-line notebook.
The main reason is mentioned in the rules -- to hide the tasks from previous days. The purpose of hiding the tasks from previous days is to allow your mind to think for itself whatever the priorities ought to be for the day -- relying on your intuition and your present context.
It's not strictly required, of course. You can just not look at any previous tasks.
Nowadays I am using a dated journal and sometimes the page starts on the right-hand side, and I just have the habit of starting with whatever is on my mind, without looking at the other pages.
<< Why cross out tasks that you stop working on, instead of crossing them out when they are completed? >>
Yes, Mark's reasons. He said it better than I could. :-)
<< What is the reason to start on the left-hand page; is the idea that today's tasks may take up more than 1 page depending on the number of lines in the notebook? >>
Yes, that is one reason, although it doesn't happen very often (to me at least) that today's tasks take up more than 1 page in my 30-line notebook.
The main reason is mentioned in the rules -- to hide the tasks from previous days. The purpose of hiding the tasks from previous days is to allow your mind to think for itself whatever the priorities ought to be for the day -- relying on your intuition and your present context.
It's not strictly required, of course. You can just not look at any previous tasks.
Nowadays I am using a dated journal and sometimes the page starts on the right-hand side, and I just have the habit of starting with whatever is on my mind, without looking at the other pages.
<< Why cross out tasks that you stop working on, instead of crossing them out when they are completed? >>
Yes, Mark's reasons. He said it better than I could. :-)
October 8, 2019 at 6:29 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Seraphim:
<< it doesn't happen very often (to me at least) that today's tasks take up more than 1 page in my 30-line notebook. >>
I was interested to read this because I remember your commenting recently on a different thread that you have more than 300 tasks on your list altogether. That would suggest that you have an awful lot of back pages.
I wonder if you could give us an idea of how the dynamics of the back pages work out. For example:
- Is there a lot of movement?
- Do you get the same sort of attenuation that you do with Simple Scanning and other Long List methods?
- How are the tasks spread over the pages, e.g. are there on average just one or two on the earlier pages?
<< it doesn't happen very often (to me at least) that today's tasks take up more than 1 page in my 30-line notebook. >>
I was interested to read this because I remember your commenting recently on a different thread that you have more than 300 tasks on your list altogether. That would suggest that you have an awful lot of back pages.
I wonder if you could give us an idea of how the dynamics of the back pages work out. For example:
- Is there a lot of movement?
- Do you get the same sort of attenuation that you do with Simple Scanning and other Long List methods?
- How are the tasks spread over the pages, e.g. are there on average just one or two on the earlier pages?
October 9, 2019 at 12:39 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Seraphim:
What I'm really trying to tease out in my immediately previous comment is how the "backlog" of 300 or so tasks actually gets there.
According to your first post on this thread the point of Today's List is that you "write down whatever is top-of-mind, whatever you need or want to do, whatever needs to get done".
In other words this is presumably a list in which you actually expect (or hope) to work on every item that day. Of course there will be days you don't succeed in doing that, but in that case you can pick them up the immediately following days.
So what I would expect to see from how you describe it is that "the tail" very rapidly diminishes. If only stuff you are actually intending to work on today gets put on the Today list (as I think you are claiming), how do around 300 tasks get left on earlier pages?
To me it sounds like a "Do It Today" version of "Do It Tomorrow" but without the audit procedure.
What I'm really trying to tease out in my immediately previous comment is how the "backlog" of 300 or so tasks actually gets there.
According to your first post on this thread the point of Today's List is that you "write down whatever is top-of-mind, whatever you need or want to do, whatever needs to get done".
In other words this is presumably a list in which you actually expect (or hope) to work on every item that day. Of course there will be days you don't succeed in doing that, but in that case you can pick them up the immediately following days.
So what I would expect to see from how you describe it is that "the tail" very rapidly diminishes. If only stuff you are actually intending to work on today gets put on the Today list (as I think you are claiming), how do around 300 tasks get left on earlier pages?
To me it sounds like a "Do It Today" version of "Do It Tomorrow" but without the audit procedure.
October 9, 2019 at 12:56 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark:
Perhaps one thing I should make clear is the specific process by which I scan these older pages. This might help in understanding what I've written below in answering your specific questions.
(1) When I return to the list after a break, I always go straight to the Today page.
(2) For example, if I had started scanning older pages, but then need to take a break after having gone through only one-third of them, when I come back to my list, I don't try to pick up going through the older pages where I had left off. I just start up again on the Today page.
(3) Also, often the reason I leave the Today page is because I have a niggling feeling I am forgetting something important. So when I start scanning the older pages, it is often to scan for important things on recent days which I may have forgotten and want to make sure I don't drop. Thus after I get to pages that are three or four days old or more, my scanning of those pages can be very cursory - sometimes I just skip over them altogether and get back to the Today page.
(4) I only scan the older pages in more detail when I really have some downtime - a solid 2-3 hours of discretionary time, after I feel somewhat free having just finished some major piece of work. These deeper scans usually occur once or twice a week - but when I am really busy, I can go for several weeks without having a chance to do this deeper scan.
(5) These dynamics can cause older pages and tasks to accumulate for awhile when I am really busy. This would happen with Long List systems too, but there is a difference. With SNL, this is perfectly fine and does not add to my cognitive load or sense of debt, since I don't pay much attention to those tasks till I actually have the time.
Now I will try to respond to your comments and questions.
<< I was interested to read this because I remember your commenting recently on a different thread that you have more than 300 tasks on your list altogether. That would suggest that you have an awful lot of back pages. I wonder if you could give us an idea of how the dynamics of the back pages work out. >>
Yes, in OneNote (my electronic version of SNL that I have been using at work), I have a lot of back pages. Not so many in my paper notebook, which I use primarily at home.
<< Is there a lot of movement? >>
There is always lots of movement in the most recent pages (a day or two old). But with the older pages, it tends to come in bursts: After a page is a few days old, it tends to go dormant for awhile, until I have some downtime. Then I can take the time to cycle back through all the older pages in more detail, deleting things that are already done or I decide are no longer needed, and getting a sense of the outstanding tasks and opportunities, and deciding where to take action and move things forward. If it's been a couple weeks or more since the last detailed cycle-through, it often results in mass deletion.
Stuff does tend to hang around longer in the OneNote vs the paper notebook. I'm not sure yet if this is because it's OneNote -- it's easier to capture things electronically and thus create a larger backlog -- or because it's at work -- which tends to be a more chaotic environment, which is a primary cause of working the older pages in bursts like this.
<< Do you get the same sort of attenuation that you do with Simple Scanning and other Long List methods? >>
Yes, the attenuation effect is pretty much the same.
<< How are the tasks spread over the pages, e.g. are there on average just one or two on the earlier pages? >>
In OneNote, here are the number of tasks on each of my open pages, starting from the Today page and working backwards (these may results in different totals from what I reported earlier, since that was a couple of days ago):
19
13
15
24
5
22
5
1
11
10
32
6
9
14
8
16
3
6
16
8
16
12
11
9
13
9
5
6
3
4
1
5
1
1
3
In my paper notebook, here are the number of tasks on each of my open pages, starting from the Today page and working backwards:
14
19
12
15
9
8
2
5
5
6
3
2
1
4
4
2
<< In other words this is presumably a list in which you actually expect (or hope) to work on every item that day. >>
No, that is not generally the case. I just write down whatever is on my mind, without regard to whether I expect to work on it that day.
<< Of course there will be days you don't succeed in doing that, but in that case you can pick them up the immediately following days. >>
The work that is immediately pertinent generally does get picked up pretty quickly. But the rest can linger for awhile.
<< So what I would expect to see from how you describe it is that "the tail" very rapidly diminishes. If only stuff you are actually intending to work on today gets put on the Today list (as I think you are claiming), how do around 300 tasks get left on earlier pages? >>
As stated above, no, I don't add only things I intend to work on today.
Also throughout the day, new things come up, triggered by emails, conversations, meetings, or just the ordinary course of work. Some of these things need to be done same-day, some next-day, and some in the "near future", and some maybe never. They all go onto the Today list.
If I happen to be really busy with a particular project for a period of time, then everything else can get put on hold for awhile. This can cause the older pages to accumulate for a while, till I have some time to review them more closely and see what stands out (either to be done or deleted) -- and this is when I often do a lot of mass deletion.
Right now, my list is longer than usual, because I've been especially busy with one project the last several weeks.
But that's OK, the other tasks are just waiting patiently on the old pages, conveniently out of the way where they don't bother me till I want them.
<< To me it sounds like a "Do It Today" version of "Do It Tomorrow" but without the audit procedure. >>
This seems to miss the "No List" aspect of it. The Today page is not anything like the accumulation of tasks built up automatically over the course of the previous day as with DIT. It's a No List, meaning it's all the active, engaging stuff that is most relevant and pertinent and top-of-mind.
There is no need for the audit procedure because the work demand is balanced against my cognitive load automatically by the fact that the core of the system is No List. I spend 90% of my time on the Today page dealing with the most active and engaging work, working in No-List fashion with the older pages as a kind of "backup" in case I forget recent urgent tasks, and stuff that doesn't get acted on immediately automatically forms a simple and practical "someday/maybe" list that is systematically reviewed during natural breaks in the active focused work. The flow is generally quite good. The older tasks tend to take care of themselves and get weeded at the appropriate time - no need to force it.
Hope that helps answer your questions!
Perhaps one thing I should make clear is the specific process by which I scan these older pages. This might help in understanding what I've written below in answering your specific questions.
(1) When I return to the list after a break, I always go straight to the Today page.
(2) For example, if I had started scanning older pages, but then need to take a break after having gone through only one-third of them, when I come back to my list, I don't try to pick up going through the older pages where I had left off. I just start up again on the Today page.
(3) Also, often the reason I leave the Today page is because I have a niggling feeling I am forgetting something important. So when I start scanning the older pages, it is often to scan for important things on recent days which I may have forgotten and want to make sure I don't drop. Thus after I get to pages that are three or four days old or more, my scanning of those pages can be very cursory - sometimes I just skip over them altogether and get back to the Today page.
(4) I only scan the older pages in more detail when I really have some downtime - a solid 2-3 hours of discretionary time, after I feel somewhat free having just finished some major piece of work. These deeper scans usually occur once or twice a week - but when I am really busy, I can go for several weeks without having a chance to do this deeper scan.
(5) These dynamics can cause older pages and tasks to accumulate for awhile when I am really busy. This would happen with Long List systems too, but there is a difference. With SNL, this is perfectly fine and does not add to my cognitive load or sense of debt, since I don't pay much attention to those tasks till I actually have the time.
Now I will try to respond to your comments and questions.
<< I was interested to read this because I remember your commenting recently on a different thread that you have more than 300 tasks on your list altogether. That would suggest that you have an awful lot of back pages. I wonder if you could give us an idea of how the dynamics of the back pages work out. >>
Yes, in OneNote (my electronic version of SNL that I have been using at work), I have a lot of back pages. Not so many in my paper notebook, which I use primarily at home.
<< Is there a lot of movement? >>
There is always lots of movement in the most recent pages (a day or two old). But with the older pages, it tends to come in bursts: After a page is a few days old, it tends to go dormant for awhile, until I have some downtime. Then I can take the time to cycle back through all the older pages in more detail, deleting things that are already done or I decide are no longer needed, and getting a sense of the outstanding tasks and opportunities, and deciding where to take action and move things forward. If it's been a couple weeks or more since the last detailed cycle-through, it often results in mass deletion.
Stuff does tend to hang around longer in the OneNote vs the paper notebook. I'm not sure yet if this is because it's OneNote -- it's easier to capture things electronically and thus create a larger backlog -- or because it's at work -- which tends to be a more chaotic environment, which is a primary cause of working the older pages in bursts like this.
<< Do you get the same sort of attenuation that you do with Simple Scanning and other Long List methods? >>
Yes, the attenuation effect is pretty much the same.
<< How are the tasks spread over the pages, e.g. are there on average just one or two on the earlier pages? >>
In OneNote, here are the number of tasks on each of my open pages, starting from the Today page and working backwards (these may results in different totals from what I reported earlier, since that was a couple of days ago):
19
13
15
24
5
22
5
1
11
10
32
6
9
14
8
16
3
6
16
8
16
12
11
9
13
9
5
6
3
4
1
5
1
1
3
In my paper notebook, here are the number of tasks on each of my open pages, starting from the Today page and working backwards:
14
19
12
15
9
8
2
5
5
6
3
2
1
4
4
2
<< In other words this is presumably a list in which you actually expect (or hope) to work on every item that day. >>
No, that is not generally the case. I just write down whatever is on my mind, without regard to whether I expect to work on it that day.
<< Of course there will be days you don't succeed in doing that, but in that case you can pick them up the immediately following days. >>
The work that is immediately pertinent generally does get picked up pretty quickly. But the rest can linger for awhile.
<< So what I would expect to see from how you describe it is that "the tail" very rapidly diminishes. If only stuff you are actually intending to work on today gets put on the Today list (as I think you are claiming), how do around 300 tasks get left on earlier pages? >>
As stated above, no, I don't add only things I intend to work on today.
Also throughout the day, new things come up, triggered by emails, conversations, meetings, or just the ordinary course of work. Some of these things need to be done same-day, some next-day, and some in the "near future", and some maybe never. They all go onto the Today list.
If I happen to be really busy with a particular project for a period of time, then everything else can get put on hold for awhile. This can cause the older pages to accumulate for a while, till I have some time to review them more closely and see what stands out (either to be done or deleted) -- and this is when I often do a lot of mass deletion.
Right now, my list is longer than usual, because I've been especially busy with one project the last several weeks.
But that's OK, the other tasks are just waiting patiently on the old pages, conveniently out of the way where they don't bother me till I want them.
<< To me it sounds like a "Do It Today" version of "Do It Tomorrow" but without the audit procedure. >>
This seems to miss the "No List" aspect of it. The Today page is not anything like the accumulation of tasks built up automatically over the course of the previous day as with DIT. It's a No List, meaning it's all the active, engaging stuff that is most relevant and pertinent and top-of-mind.
There is no need for the audit procedure because the work demand is balanced against my cognitive load automatically by the fact that the core of the system is No List. I spend 90% of my time on the Today page dealing with the most active and engaging work, working in No-List fashion with the older pages as a kind of "backup" in case I forget recent urgent tasks, and stuff that doesn't get acted on immediately automatically forms a simple and practical "someday/maybe" list that is systematically reviewed during natural breaks in the active focused work. The flow is generally quite good. The older tasks tend to take care of themselves and get weeded at the appropriate time - no need to force it.
Hope that helps answer your questions!
October 11, 2019 at 7:37 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Mark -
Your comparison to DIT prompted me to re-read what I had written about using SNL to "get a sense of completion and closure like DIT".
http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2739664
And there I *did* write about starting the day by asking the question, "What do I want to have done today?"
This may have led to some confusion. This idea, to start the day with this question, isn't part of the actual rules of the system, and I realize now that I have completely left this idea behind. I think that happened because I was experimenting for a time with different questions to see what kind of effect it had on the system, and eventually decided that I preferred having no specific question at all.
I remember we had a series of discussions like this with Final Version Perfected (FVP). The question could have a rather profound impact. But eventually you went with just going with whatever stood out, with no question at all, and many of us followed you in that. I think that's similar to what I did here.
But this discussion makes me think it is worth revisiting. I wonder if the list would get shorter if I used that question consistently. I am not really sure it *needs* to get shorter -- it's been totally fine have 200 or 300 items on the list -- but it still sounds like an interesting experiment.
Your comparison to DIT prompted me to re-read what I had written about using SNL to "get a sense of completion and closure like DIT".
http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2739664
And there I *did* write about starting the day by asking the question, "What do I want to have done today?"
This may have led to some confusion. This idea, to start the day with this question, isn't part of the actual rules of the system, and I realize now that I have completely left this idea behind. I think that happened because I was experimenting for a time with different questions to see what kind of effect it had on the system, and eventually decided that I preferred having no specific question at all.
I remember we had a series of discussions like this with Final Version Perfected (FVP). The question could have a rather profound impact. But eventually you went with just going with whatever stood out, with no question at all, and many of us followed you in that. I think that's similar to what I did here.
But this discussion makes me think it is worth revisiting. I wonder if the list would get shorter if I used that question consistently. I am not really sure it *needs* to get shorter -- it's been totally fine have 200 or 300 items on the list -- but it still sounds like an interesting experiment.
October 11, 2019 at 16:06 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Seraphim, I can't see what's special about this? Don't you effectively just have a big to-do list with some things going nowhere? People have been doing that since time began. In what sense is it "no list" when it's literally a list of hundreds of tasks? And the things you are doing should be dictated by what matters in your life, not dictated by finding the right way to word a question to yourself, no? Would you honestly not do something that needed doing because you didn't phrase a question to yourself the right way?
Help me to understand what's different about this.
Help me to understand what's different about this.
October 11, 2019 at 17:36 |
Chris
Chris
Hi Chris -
I've ended up with 200-300+ tasks in my lists, no matter what time management system I use. I think it's more an outcome of my environment (large family, demanding job, always way too much stuff going on but still have to figure out what to do, etc.) and my personality (always lots of ideas and aspirations) than any particular system.
<< I can't see what's special about this? >>
Consider this:
-- the system keeps me engaged on focused on the most important things
-- it keeps me on top of my work and getting great results
-- it does all this consistently and effortlessly
-- it's been delivering all that for the last 9+ months with essentially no changes to the system
-- with no resistance or procrastination
-- with no feeling of debt or backlogs hanging around
-- with no sense of overwhelm or cognitive load
-- with no sense of the system itself ever getting in my way
-- with no temptations to give it up and try another system
-- And it does all that, EVEN WHEN it carries a backlog of 300+ tasks
I've never had a system that did all that before. Many of Mark's systems have come close, but I could not get all of these effects all together at once, so easily and so consistently, and have it work so well over such a long period of time, with no signs of giving any trouble into the future.
<< Don't you effectively just have a big to-do list with some things going nowhere? People have been doing that since time began. >>
If it's the right things going nowhere, letting me focus on more pressing matters while waiting for the right time to start going somewhere, then the system is doing what it's supposed to do. Have you ever used a simple to-do list that gave you that, with no cognitive load, no resistance, no sense of overwhelm or task debt? I haven't.
<< In what sense is it "no list" when it's literally a list of hundreds of tasks? >>
90% of the time I am focused on the Today page, which is a No List. That's the heart of the system.
<< And the things you are doing should be dictated by what matters in your life, not dictated by finding the right way to word a question to yourself, no? >>
Yes, of course, and that's actually what this system does, that's how the day begins, every day. With no questions at all, this works pretty well. But sometimes in life we do need to ask ourselves, if we aren't 100% happy with the answers we are getting, maybe we are asking the wrong questions? Trying new questions is worthwhile.
<< Would you honestly not do something that needed doing because you didn't phrase a question to yourself the right way? >>
Of course not. Did I say anything like that? I see adjusting between "start the day with whatever is on my mind" vs "start the day by asking myself a prompt question before writing down whatever is on my mind" as a very minor difference -- a nuance. Sometimes the nuances can have an oversized impact, for good or for ill, so it's fun to experiment with it and see if it gives an improvement.
But it's not the heart of the system. The heart of the system is capturing what I already know I need to do and putting it on paper front-and-center so I can make it visible and think through it more effectively and get it done more effectively -- that's the heart of No List, at least in my experience. Adding a question just frames it a little differently, and sometimes that re-framing is useful.
Not sure if that answers your concerns?
Anyway, if it can do all this for someone like me who regularly generates lists of 200-300 tasks, I suppose it would be even more effective for those who generate more reasonably sized lists of 50-100 tasks.
I've ended up with 200-300+ tasks in my lists, no matter what time management system I use. I think it's more an outcome of my environment (large family, demanding job, always way too much stuff going on but still have to figure out what to do, etc.) and my personality (always lots of ideas and aspirations) than any particular system.
<< I can't see what's special about this? >>
Consider this:
-- the system keeps me engaged on focused on the most important things
-- it keeps me on top of my work and getting great results
-- it does all this consistently and effortlessly
-- it's been delivering all that for the last 9+ months with essentially no changes to the system
-- with no resistance or procrastination
-- with no feeling of debt or backlogs hanging around
-- with no sense of overwhelm or cognitive load
-- with no sense of the system itself ever getting in my way
-- with no temptations to give it up and try another system
-- And it does all that, EVEN WHEN it carries a backlog of 300+ tasks
I've never had a system that did all that before. Many of Mark's systems have come close, but I could not get all of these effects all together at once, so easily and so consistently, and have it work so well over such a long period of time, with no signs of giving any trouble into the future.
<< Don't you effectively just have a big to-do list with some things going nowhere? People have been doing that since time began. >>
If it's the right things going nowhere, letting me focus on more pressing matters while waiting for the right time to start going somewhere, then the system is doing what it's supposed to do. Have you ever used a simple to-do list that gave you that, with no cognitive load, no resistance, no sense of overwhelm or task debt? I haven't.
<< In what sense is it "no list" when it's literally a list of hundreds of tasks? >>
90% of the time I am focused on the Today page, which is a No List. That's the heart of the system.
<< And the things you are doing should be dictated by what matters in your life, not dictated by finding the right way to word a question to yourself, no? >>
Yes, of course, and that's actually what this system does, that's how the day begins, every day. With no questions at all, this works pretty well. But sometimes in life we do need to ask ourselves, if we aren't 100% happy with the answers we are getting, maybe we are asking the wrong questions? Trying new questions is worthwhile.
<< Would you honestly not do something that needed doing because you didn't phrase a question to yourself the right way? >>
Of course not. Did I say anything like that? I see adjusting between "start the day with whatever is on my mind" vs "start the day by asking myself a prompt question before writing down whatever is on my mind" as a very minor difference -- a nuance. Sometimes the nuances can have an oversized impact, for good or for ill, so it's fun to experiment with it and see if it gives an improvement.
But it's not the heart of the system. The heart of the system is capturing what I already know I need to do and putting it on paper front-and-center so I can make it visible and think through it more effectively and get it done more effectively -- that's the heart of No List, at least in my experience. Adding a question just frames it a little differently, and sometimes that re-framing is useful.
Not sure if that answers your concerns?
Anyway, if it can do all this for someone like me who regularly generates lists of 200-300 tasks, I suppose it would be even more effective for those who generate more reasonably sized lists of 50-100 tasks.
October 12, 2019 at 3:54 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Thanks for sharing your method and ideas Seraphim. I've just started using your system over the last few days. I particularly like the design of starting the day fresh and without the need to read through a list of outstanding tasks which can create that feeling of debt and burden.
October 12, 2019 at 9:39 |
Leon
Leon
As for the title, 'serial today list' seems more accurate to me.
October 12, 2019 at 9:40 |
Leon
Leon
"As for the title, 'serial today list' seems more accurate to me."
Besides while SNL is clearly trademarked, St. Louis may not care if you use STL :)
Besides while SNL is clearly trademarked, St. Louis may not care if you use STL :)
October 12, 2019 at 18:28 |
vegheadjones
vegheadjones
...or Serial Now List? I don't think 'Saturday Nght Live' would mind, either @ vegheadjones :) Anyway, thanks for sharing Seraphim!
October 12, 2019 at 19:58 |
Leon
Leon
Seraphim:
From your reply to Chris:
<< 90% of the time I am focused on the Today page, which is a No List. That's the heart of the system.>>
So you are spending 90% of your time on some 30-40 tasks, and 10% of your time on the remaining 300 tasks? That means that the tasks on back pages each get an average of only 1/3,000th of your time each day.
If the remaining tasks are such low priority, why bother with them at all? I mean you must by now have a pretty good idea which tasks are going to end up on the back pages. Why put them on the list in the first place?
From your reply to Chris:
<< 90% of the time I am focused on the Today page, which is a No List. That's the heart of the system.>>
So you are spending 90% of your time on some 30-40 tasks, and 10% of your time on the remaining 300 tasks? That means that the tasks on back pages each get an average of only 1/3,000th of your time each day.
If the remaining tasks are such low priority, why bother with them at all? I mean you must by now have a pretty good idea which tasks are going to end up on the back pages. Why put them on the list in the first place?
October 13, 2019 at 21:12 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark -
<< If the remaining tasks are such low priority, why bother with them at all? >>
The main reason is they have not yet stood out as being ready to be deleted.
But also, keeping the older pages has proven very helpful to ensure I don't forget about things. Keeping the older pages gives the system a more "grounded" feeling than using pure No-List (where you discard the lists at end of the day or even more frequently). They provide a natural break from the fast pace that No-List tends to inspire -- balancing the fast pace and flow of the Today List with a more reflective review of the older tasks from time to time.
<< I mean you must by now have a pretty good idea which tasks are going to end up on the back pages. Why put them on the list in the first place? >>
Actually I don't know ahead of time. I spend most of my time in the Complex and Chaotic quadrants of the Cynefin framework, following probe-sense-respond and act-sense-respond models (respectively). It is a more emergent process.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynefin_framework
So I put whatever comes to mind on the list, and let my intuition decide what to work on and when, and see what emerges.
Keeping the older pages around for a while does not pose any problem at all, since they only get cursory attention until I am ready for them. It doesn't create any sense of task debt or backlog. The system remains lightweight and always feels fresh. So there really isn't any need to find a way to trim the old tasks more quickly. Their time will come soon enough, and the standing-out process works just fine.
I think this is one of the key reasons why this system works so well. It presents the tasks to you when you are naturally ready to evaluate them -- and keeps them invisible in the meantime. The flow always feel very natural.
<< If the remaining tasks are such low priority, why bother with them at all? >>
The main reason is they have not yet stood out as being ready to be deleted.
But also, keeping the older pages has proven very helpful to ensure I don't forget about things. Keeping the older pages gives the system a more "grounded" feeling than using pure No-List (where you discard the lists at end of the day or even more frequently). They provide a natural break from the fast pace that No-List tends to inspire -- balancing the fast pace and flow of the Today List with a more reflective review of the older tasks from time to time.
<< I mean you must by now have a pretty good idea which tasks are going to end up on the back pages. Why put them on the list in the first place? >>
Actually I don't know ahead of time. I spend most of my time in the Complex and Chaotic quadrants of the Cynefin framework, following probe-sense-respond and act-sense-respond models (respectively). It is a more emergent process.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynefin_framework
So I put whatever comes to mind on the list, and let my intuition decide what to work on and when, and see what emerges.
Keeping the older pages around for a while does not pose any problem at all, since they only get cursory attention until I am ready for them. It doesn't create any sense of task debt or backlog. The system remains lightweight and always feels fresh. So there really isn't any need to find a way to trim the old tasks more quickly. Their time will come soon enough, and the standing-out process works just fine.
I think this is one of the key reasons why this system works so well. It presents the tasks to you when you are naturally ready to evaluate them -- and keeps them invisible in the meantime. The flow always feel very natural.
October 14, 2019 at 1:01 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Leon -
<< I particularly like the design of starting the day fresh and without the need to read through a list of outstanding tasks which can create that feeling of debt and burden. >>
Glad to hear it! Please keep us posted on how it works out for you!
<< I particularly like the design of starting the day fresh and without the need to read through a list of outstanding tasks which can create that feeling of debt and burden. >>
Glad to hear it! Please keep us posted on how it works out for you!
October 14, 2019 at 1:04 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Leon and vegheadjones -
Maybe we should have a naming contest. :-)
Maybe we should have a naming contest. :-)
October 14, 2019 at 1:04 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Seraphim:
<< Maybe we should have a naming contest. :-) >>
The Wikipedia article on Cynefin has the ideal name for your system: turangawaewae, which is Maori for "a place to stand".
http://teara.govt.nz/en/papatuanuku-the-land/page-5
"Tūrangawaewae are places where we feel especially empowered and connected".
<< Maybe we should have a naming contest. :-) >>
The Wikipedia article on Cynefin has the ideal name for your system: turangawaewae, which is Maori for "a place to stand".
http://teara.govt.nz/en/papatuanuku-the-land/page-5
"Tūrangawaewae are places where we feel especially empowered and connected".
October 14, 2019 at 10:33 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
And... BOOM! The old pages have now dropped from 300+ down to 108 tasks.
Today was an interesting day. We are finishing up our Q3 work, and going into our quarterly SAFe planning meetings for the next couple of days.
And I found that all of our preparation for the meetings is done, and I had a couple hours of free time.
There was nothing pressing for me to do -- we are all caught up and ready for the coming planning sessions.
And that's when the older pages start to "stand out" and say "OK it's time to deal with us now!"
The more recent pages (1 or 2 weeks old) had several lingering non-urgent action items that needed to be addressed, so I quickly took care of those. But soon I got into the pages where:
-- most of the stuff had already been completed, or
-- there were notes or ideas that needed to be filed / archived but no action needed
-- there were several items that were blocked because I need to meet with someone to discuss - so I created several agendas for future meetings - thus consolidating all those tasks into a few agendas
-- there were several items of general interest - someday/maybes - usually something to read or explore; I deleted most of these, but the ones that looked promising, I just put into my reading list. No reason to have them clogging up my time management system.
In the end, I cleared out *ALL* of my old OneNote pages, and a few of my paper-notebook pages. This leaves me with just 8 items on my Today list in OneNote, and 21 tasks in my Today list in my paper notebook, and exactly 100 tasks in my paper notebook on older pages, for a total of 129 tasks.
This follows the pattern I was trying to describe in the last few posts in this thread -- the older pages are just fine lying dormant, getting very little attention, until in the natural course of work I find that they begin to stand out -- and then they get cleared out pretty quickly. This example is probably a bit more extreme than usual -- I don't usually accumulate quite so many old tasks -- and I don't usually blast through 200 tasks in one go (actioning, deleting, archiving). But it still follows the same general pattern.
It feels great - I feel on top of my work, my inboxes are clear, the things that need focus are getting focus, nothing is falling through the cracks, I'm getting a lot done, and my work follows a natural, intuitive rhythm with no sense of overwhelm or procrastination. I'm pretty happy. 🙂🙂🙂
Today was an interesting day. We are finishing up our Q3 work, and going into our quarterly SAFe planning meetings for the next couple of days.
And I found that all of our preparation for the meetings is done, and I had a couple hours of free time.
There was nothing pressing for me to do -- we are all caught up and ready for the coming planning sessions.
And that's when the older pages start to "stand out" and say "OK it's time to deal with us now!"
The more recent pages (1 or 2 weeks old) had several lingering non-urgent action items that needed to be addressed, so I quickly took care of those. But soon I got into the pages where:
-- most of the stuff had already been completed, or
-- there were notes or ideas that needed to be filed / archived but no action needed
-- there were several items that were blocked because I need to meet with someone to discuss - so I created several agendas for future meetings - thus consolidating all those tasks into a few agendas
-- there were several items of general interest - someday/maybes - usually something to read or explore; I deleted most of these, but the ones that looked promising, I just put into my reading list. No reason to have them clogging up my time management system.
In the end, I cleared out *ALL* of my old OneNote pages, and a few of my paper-notebook pages. This leaves me with just 8 items on my Today list in OneNote, and 21 tasks in my Today list in my paper notebook, and exactly 100 tasks in my paper notebook on older pages, for a total of 129 tasks.
This follows the pattern I was trying to describe in the last few posts in this thread -- the older pages are just fine lying dormant, getting very little attention, until in the natural course of work I find that they begin to stand out -- and then they get cleared out pretty quickly. This example is probably a bit more extreme than usual -- I don't usually accumulate quite so many old tasks -- and I don't usually blast through 200 tasks in one go (actioning, deleting, archiving). But it still follows the same general pattern.
It feels great - I feel on top of my work, my inboxes are clear, the things that need focus are getting focus, nothing is falling through the cracks, I'm getting a lot done, and my work follows a natural, intuitive rhythm with no sense of overwhelm or procrastination. I'm pretty happy. 🙂🙂🙂
October 15, 2019 at 3:05 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Mark -
<< "Tūrangawaewae are places where we feel especially empowered and connected". >>
I love the concept! But, um, that is quite a mouthful! LOL
<< "Tūrangawaewae are places where we feel especially empowered and connected". >>
I love the concept! But, um, that is quite a mouthful! LOL
October 15, 2019 at 3:13 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
<< I feel on top of my work, my inboxes are clear, the things that need focus are getting focus, nothing is falling through the cracks, I'm getting a lot done, and my work follows a natural, intuitive rhythm with no sense of overwhelm or procrastination. >>
Ok, you've sold it to me!
I'm going to try it out.
Ok, you've sold it to me!
I'm going to try it out.
October 15, 2019 at 11:42 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Seraphim:
At one stage you started entering tasks at back of the notebook instead of the front. Are you still doing that? Or didn't it work out?
At one stage you started entering tasks at back of the notebook instead of the front. Are you still doing that? Or didn't it work out?
October 15, 2019 at 11:46 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark -
<< I'm going to try it out. >>
Great! I look forward to hearing how it goes for you!
<< At one stage you started entering tasks at back of the notebook instead of the front. >>
It was working fine, but I wanted to see how it would work with a dated journal. For now, I prefer the dated journal, but sometimes I have more tasks than will fit on the dated page. If I return to using an undated notebook in the future, I am pretty sure I would enter tasks at the back of the notebook - I really liked that flow.
<< I'm going to try it out. >>
Great! I look forward to hearing how it goes for you!
<< At one stage you started entering tasks at back of the notebook instead of the front. >>
It was working fine, but I wanted to see how it would work with a dated journal. For now, I prefer the dated journal, but sometimes I have more tasks than will fit on the dated page. If I return to using an undated notebook in the future, I am pretty sure I would enter tasks at the back of the notebook - I really liked that flow.
October 15, 2019 at 15:59 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Hi Seraphim,
I have a question. In one post a while ago, you mentioned re-entering on tomorrow's page any items one had worked on and didn't need to see again today.
I tried that, and found that was the case for almost all my work. My work is mostly comprised of projects spanning days, weeks, or months. It led to a loosely DIT-ish page of tasks, and not much of a no-list feeling—the day began with several tasks already entered.
Is that the case for you? Do you still re-enter to tomorrow the things you no longer need to see today?
(And actually, if anyone has ideas on what kind of system is best for managing that sort of work, I'd be eager to hear it.)
I have a question. In one post a while ago, you mentioned re-entering on tomorrow's page any items one had worked on and didn't need to see again today.
I tried that, and found that was the case for almost all my work. My work is mostly comprised of projects spanning days, weeks, or months. It led to a loosely DIT-ish page of tasks, and not much of a no-list feeling—the day began with several tasks already entered.
Is that the case for you? Do you still re-enter to tomorrow the things you no longer need to see today?
(And actually, if anyone has ideas on what kind of system is best for managing that sort of work, I'd be eager to hear it.)
October 16, 2019 at 12:27 |
Michaelis
Michaelis
Michaelis -
<< … the day began with several tasks already entered. Is that the case for you? Do you still re-enter to tomorrow the things you no longer need to see today? >>
I typically start the day with less than 3 or 4 items pre-entered on the Today page. At the start-of-day startup process, I ignore them, draw a line below them, and then do my brainstorm for the day, writing down whatever is on my mind.
I've experimented with different approaches here. At first, I was re-entering daily recurring items like email, and when I felt like I didn't want to see that task anymore today, I would re-enter it on Tomorrow's page.
But after a while, I had the same experience as you -- the list started to be dominated by these items. It started to feel more like DIT, and interfered with the start-of-day startup process.
After reflecting on what was happening, it occurred to me that when I was doing straight "no-list", I never needed to remind myself about daily recurring items. They became habitual processes that would arise at the natural time. This also happened with most weekly recurring items. So there was no need for any prompt or reminder for those tasks. I only needed prompts and reminders for things I would be likely to forget.
So for those kinds of frequently-recurring tasks, here is what I do now. I don't have any prompt or reminder, and I don't enter them on the Tomorrow page. I just enter them on my Today list when they come to mind.
So what *do* I put on the Tomorrow page - or other future pages?
-- longer-term recurring items that I am likely to forget (e.g., clean the A/C filter once a month) (these items can also go into a reminder system, but I like having them in my notebook)
-- follow-ups (e.g., I sent an email to someone and need to make sure I follow up tomorrow)
<< (And actually, if anyone has ideas on what kind of system is best for managing that sort of work, I'd be eager to hear it.) >>
For a very regular workload like that, I would guess that straight DIT would work just fine.
But if you find yourself getting behind with DIT, and the DIT "audit of commitments" process doesn't solve the problem, I think it's important to figure out why. I think the audit would work fine to diagnose straight overcommitment -- too many projects -- and can help you trim them. But if, like me, the problem is that you work in an environment where a lot of the work is emergent, and you often can't determine fixed priorities ahead of time, that's when I would move away from DIT and use something like Serial No-List.
So how to handle these projects in Serial No-List? I'd probably just leave them all on the Today page. I'd only re-enter them on a future page when it is getting annoying to keep seeing them on the Today page - or maybe just delete them and expect them to come back by themselves.
Does any of that help?
<< … the day began with several tasks already entered. Is that the case for you? Do you still re-enter to tomorrow the things you no longer need to see today? >>
I typically start the day with less than 3 or 4 items pre-entered on the Today page. At the start-of-day startup process, I ignore them, draw a line below them, and then do my brainstorm for the day, writing down whatever is on my mind.
I've experimented with different approaches here. At first, I was re-entering daily recurring items like email, and when I felt like I didn't want to see that task anymore today, I would re-enter it on Tomorrow's page.
But after a while, I had the same experience as you -- the list started to be dominated by these items. It started to feel more like DIT, and interfered with the start-of-day startup process.
After reflecting on what was happening, it occurred to me that when I was doing straight "no-list", I never needed to remind myself about daily recurring items. They became habitual processes that would arise at the natural time. This also happened with most weekly recurring items. So there was no need for any prompt or reminder for those tasks. I only needed prompts and reminders for things I would be likely to forget.
So for those kinds of frequently-recurring tasks, here is what I do now. I don't have any prompt or reminder, and I don't enter them on the Tomorrow page. I just enter them on my Today list when they come to mind.
So what *do* I put on the Tomorrow page - or other future pages?
-- longer-term recurring items that I am likely to forget (e.g., clean the A/C filter once a month) (these items can also go into a reminder system, but I like having them in my notebook)
-- follow-ups (e.g., I sent an email to someone and need to make sure I follow up tomorrow)
<< (And actually, if anyone has ideas on what kind of system is best for managing that sort of work, I'd be eager to hear it.) >>
For a very regular workload like that, I would guess that straight DIT would work just fine.
But if you find yourself getting behind with DIT, and the DIT "audit of commitments" process doesn't solve the problem, I think it's important to figure out why. I think the audit would work fine to diagnose straight overcommitment -- too many projects -- and can help you trim them. But if, like me, the problem is that you work in an environment where a lot of the work is emergent, and you often can't determine fixed priorities ahead of time, that's when I would move away from DIT and use something like Serial No-List.
So how to handle these projects in Serial No-List? I'd probably just leave them all on the Today page. I'd only re-enter them on a future page when it is getting annoying to keep seeing them on the Today page - or maybe just delete them and expect them to come back by themselves.
Does any of that help?
October 16, 2019 at 17:32 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Hi Serpahim, thanks for expanding on your approach. From that and your followup posts your approach is clearly working well. It'll be interesting to see how Mark gets on with it. To respond to a few of your own comments:
S: "I've ended up with 200-300+ tasks in my lists"
I don't get anywhere near that on a list, not because I'm not having the same amount of work or thinking of the same number of ideas but because I don't think a to-do list is the right place for every idea that enters my mind. I don't want my list to mirror the random ideas appearing in my mind, I want my list to be a reminder of what I have decided matters around now.
S: [list of things SNL is doing for you]
S: "I've never had a system that did all that before."
I'm using a simple calendar and a short to-do list to get the same results. The calendar is the most important of the two. I use both to plan stuff and to drive focused ideas elsewhere, whereas this SNL approach seems to use the list to capture all unfocused ideas and then sift and sort them and try to bring them into focus later on.
I have tried that approach, it doesn't work for me at all. I'm certainly not having a go at it – it's a cost-benefit analysis, for me the cost of that approach is too great (multiple touches of items, mentally swapping back and forth dictated by the list, capturing minutiae with the same relevance as stuff that matters, capturing stuff that's relevant at different times all alongside each other).
S: "If it's the right things going nowhere, letting me focus on more pressing matters while waiting for the right time to start going somewhere, then the system is doing what it's supposed to do. Have you ever used a simple to-do list that gave you that, with no cognitive load, no resistance, no sense of overwhelm or task debt? I haven't."
The calendar works for me. I don't have a list of things that are going nowhere in the first place so I avoid creating that problem and then needing to solve it.
S: "90% of the time I am focused on the Today page, which is a No List."
I still don't understand why this is called No List – is it not literally an unsorted to-do list of tasks? It sounds like a big to-do list spanning multiple pages in a book, where focus is on the end of the list (Today page) as with most big to-do lists, and with periodic pruning of the earlier items when time permits or when stress dictates. This is how most unsorted to-do lists I've ever encountered tend to end up.
Me: "Would you honestly not do something that needed doing because you didn't phrase a question to yourself the right way?"
S: "Of course not. Did I say anything like that?"
Forgive me, I think so, in your reply to Mark you wrote "I wonder if the list would get shorter if I used that question consistently". My feeling is that life doesn't care about to-do lists getting longer or shorter, life cares about what matters, and what matters doesn't care about how you phrased a question to yourself. I've found that I can become a master at self-sabotage by allowing myself to imagine otherwise.
Thanks again for the additional info.
S: "I've ended up with 200-300+ tasks in my lists"
I don't get anywhere near that on a list, not because I'm not having the same amount of work or thinking of the same number of ideas but because I don't think a to-do list is the right place for every idea that enters my mind. I don't want my list to mirror the random ideas appearing in my mind, I want my list to be a reminder of what I have decided matters around now.
S: [list of things SNL is doing for you]
S: "I've never had a system that did all that before."
I'm using a simple calendar and a short to-do list to get the same results. The calendar is the most important of the two. I use both to plan stuff and to drive focused ideas elsewhere, whereas this SNL approach seems to use the list to capture all unfocused ideas and then sift and sort them and try to bring them into focus later on.
I have tried that approach, it doesn't work for me at all. I'm certainly not having a go at it – it's a cost-benefit analysis, for me the cost of that approach is too great (multiple touches of items, mentally swapping back and forth dictated by the list, capturing minutiae with the same relevance as stuff that matters, capturing stuff that's relevant at different times all alongside each other).
S: "If it's the right things going nowhere, letting me focus on more pressing matters while waiting for the right time to start going somewhere, then the system is doing what it's supposed to do. Have you ever used a simple to-do list that gave you that, with no cognitive load, no resistance, no sense of overwhelm or task debt? I haven't."
The calendar works for me. I don't have a list of things that are going nowhere in the first place so I avoid creating that problem and then needing to solve it.
S: "90% of the time I am focused on the Today page, which is a No List."
I still don't understand why this is called No List – is it not literally an unsorted to-do list of tasks? It sounds like a big to-do list spanning multiple pages in a book, where focus is on the end of the list (Today page) as with most big to-do lists, and with periodic pruning of the earlier items when time permits or when stress dictates. This is how most unsorted to-do lists I've ever encountered tend to end up.
Me: "Would you honestly not do something that needed doing because you didn't phrase a question to yourself the right way?"
S: "Of course not. Did I say anything like that?"
Forgive me, I think so, in your reply to Mark you wrote "I wonder if the list would get shorter if I used that question consistently". My feeling is that life doesn't care about to-do lists getting longer or shorter, life cares about what matters, and what matters doesn't care about how you phrased a question to yourself. I've found that I can become a master at self-sabotage by allowing myself to imagine otherwise.
Thanks again for the additional info.
October 17, 2019 at 2:36 |
Chris
Chris
Chris -
Thank you for the thoughtful comments.
<< I don't think a to-do list is the right place for every idea that enters my mind. I don't want my list to mirror the random ideas appearing in my mind >>
I don't either. I don't write down every random idea.
<< I want my list to be a reminder of what I have decided matters around now. >>
Perhaps this is the difference in how we use our lists. I use the list *to help me decide what matters*. I don't see it only as a to-do list, but also as a thinking too (maybe primarily a thinking tool), to help bring clarity to all the competing demands and figure out what really matters. Apparently, you are able to maintain a habit of making those decisions off-list, and then only enter the stuff on your list that needs to be done as a result of those decisions. I am not so good at doing all that in my head, and I like having the thinking and doing all integrated in one system.
<< I'm using a simple calendar and a short to-do list to get the same results. >>
Great! I'm glad that works for you, but I've tried it, and it doesn't work for me. Different methods will work for different people.
<< whereas this SNL approach seems to use the list to capture all unfocused ideas and then sift and sort them and try to bring them into focus later on. >>
Yes, that is pretty much exactly what it does. Although I would not want you to interpret "all unfocused ideas" to mean "every random idea appearing in my mind", as I have already clarified above. And "later on" means "moments later" - the sifting and sorting and focusing starts to happen immediately, and I generally get a good focus for the day within a few minutes. A large majority of the stuff on the list gets handled same-day. The other items get handled later, and many are eventually deleted, but it all happens naturally and automatically.
I guess what I am saying is: I see this as a feature, not a bug. 🙂
<< I have tried that approach, it doesn't work for me at all. >>
Different methods will work for different people.
<< for me the cost of that approach is too great (multiple touches of items, mentally swapping back and forth dictated by the list, ..., capturing stuff that's relevant at different times all alongside each other >>
The overhead of this is surprisingly low with SNL. As I've said many times, 80-90% of the time is focused on the Today page. It maintains a strong focus with essentially no overhead - I never notice the system. It's quick and easy to cycle through this page, and helps me decide intuitively where to focus. It is probably similar to your short to-do list.
<< capturing minutiae with the same relevance as stuff that matters >>
As Mark has often said, minutiae have a habit of asserting their importance if they are neglected. If it is on my mind - then there is probably a good reason for it - and it goes on my Today list.
<< I don't have a list of things that are going nowhere in the first place so I avoid creating that problem and then needing to solve it. >>
You don't ever have ideas or projects that are on the back-burner because you can't give them immediate attention? My mind doesn't work that way. I'm always thinking of ways to improve, ideas to explore. I need a place to bookmark those things so they aren't lost, while I am focusing on the other things that need my attention today.
<< I still don't understand why this is called No List >>
"No List" is jargon specific to this site, and the term has a specific meaning. If I remember right, Mark primarily meant to show a contrast with long lists that hang around for a while. No Lists are general-purpose dynamic lists that you'd normally discard at end of day.
SNL gives the best of both worlds - No-List engagement and focus on the Today page, together with Long-List continuity and completeness, with a simple and natural transition between the two.
<< focus is on the end of the list (Today page) as with most big to-do lists, and with periodic pruning of the earlier items when time permits or when stress dictates. This is how most unsorted to-do lists I've ever encountered tend to end up. >>
I think this is one reason unsorted to-do lists work as well as they do, despite all their shortcomings.
<< in your reply to Mark you wrote "I wonder if the list would get shorter if I used that question consistently". My feeling is that life doesn't care about to-do lists getting longer or shorter, life cares about what matters >>
My wondering about whether the list would get shorter was not about getting less done, but about keeping a sharper focus. The same pressures and target outcomes exist, and make themselves known by what appears on my Today list. The question just changes the focus.
For example, if I find myself a bit scattered, I can narrow the focus by asking "What do I need to have done TODAY?" On the other hand, if I find myself with too narrow a focus, getting tasks done but not getting the actual outcomes that I want, I can ask myself "Where do I really need to focus?" or "What outcomes am I trying to achieve?"
You are right, it doesn't change the actual pressures or demands. But it helps me think more clearly about them.
Maybe this just highlights the difference between what we expect to get out of our time-management systems. For you, it seems to be an execution tool - your thinking happens before anything makes its way onto your list. For me, the list itself is at least as much of a thinking tool as an execution tool.
Thank you for the thoughtful comments.
<< I don't think a to-do list is the right place for every idea that enters my mind. I don't want my list to mirror the random ideas appearing in my mind >>
I don't either. I don't write down every random idea.
<< I want my list to be a reminder of what I have decided matters around now. >>
Perhaps this is the difference in how we use our lists. I use the list *to help me decide what matters*. I don't see it only as a to-do list, but also as a thinking too (maybe primarily a thinking tool), to help bring clarity to all the competing demands and figure out what really matters. Apparently, you are able to maintain a habit of making those decisions off-list, and then only enter the stuff on your list that needs to be done as a result of those decisions. I am not so good at doing all that in my head, and I like having the thinking and doing all integrated in one system.
<< I'm using a simple calendar and a short to-do list to get the same results. >>
Great! I'm glad that works for you, but I've tried it, and it doesn't work for me. Different methods will work for different people.
<< whereas this SNL approach seems to use the list to capture all unfocused ideas and then sift and sort them and try to bring them into focus later on. >>
Yes, that is pretty much exactly what it does. Although I would not want you to interpret "all unfocused ideas" to mean "every random idea appearing in my mind", as I have already clarified above. And "later on" means "moments later" - the sifting and sorting and focusing starts to happen immediately, and I generally get a good focus for the day within a few minutes. A large majority of the stuff on the list gets handled same-day. The other items get handled later, and many are eventually deleted, but it all happens naturally and automatically.
I guess what I am saying is: I see this as a feature, not a bug. 🙂
<< I have tried that approach, it doesn't work for me at all. >>
Different methods will work for different people.
<< for me the cost of that approach is too great (multiple touches of items, mentally swapping back and forth dictated by the list, ..., capturing stuff that's relevant at different times all alongside each other >>
The overhead of this is surprisingly low with SNL. As I've said many times, 80-90% of the time is focused on the Today page. It maintains a strong focus with essentially no overhead - I never notice the system. It's quick and easy to cycle through this page, and helps me decide intuitively where to focus. It is probably similar to your short to-do list.
<< capturing minutiae with the same relevance as stuff that matters >>
As Mark has often said, minutiae have a habit of asserting their importance if they are neglected. If it is on my mind - then there is probably a good reason for it - and it goes on my Today list.
<< I don't have a list of things that are going nowhere in the first place so I avoid creating that problem and then needing to solve it. >>
You don't ever have ideas or projects that are on the back-burner because you can't give them immediate attention? My mind doesn't work that way. I'm always thinking of ways to improve, ideas to explore. I need a place to bookmark those things so they aren't lost, while I am focusing on the other things that need my attention today.
<< I still don't understand why this is called No List >>
"No List" is jargon specific to this site, and the term has a specific meaning. If I remember right, Mark primarily meant to show a contrast with long lists that hang around for a while. No Lists are general-purpose dynamic lists that you'd normally discard at end of day.
SNL gives the best of both worlds - No-List engagement and focus on the Today page, together with Long-List continuity and completeness, with a simple and natural transition between the two.
<< focus is on the end of the list (Today page) as with most big to-do lists, and with periodic pruning of the earlier items when time permits or when stress dictates. This is how most unsorted to-do lists I've ever encountered tend to end up. >>
I think this is one reason unsorted to-do lists work as well as they do, despite all their shortcomings.
<< in your reply to Mark you wrote "I wonder if the list would get shorter if I used that question consistently". My feeling is that life doesn't care about to-do lists getting longer or shorter, life cares about what matters >>
My wondering about whether the list would get shorter was not about getting less done, but about keeping a sharper focus. The same pressures and target outcomes exist, and make themselves known by what appears on my Today list. The question just changes the focus.
For example, if I find myself a bit scattered, I can narrow the focus by asking "What do I need to have done TODAY?" On the other hand, if I find myself with too narrow a focus, getting tasks done but not getting the actual outcomes that I want, I can ask myself "Where do I really need to focus?" or "What outcomes am I trying to achieve?"
You are right, it doesn't change the actual pressures or demands. But it helps me think more clearly about them.
Maybe this just highlights the difference between what we expect to get out of our time-management systems. For you, it seems to be an execution tool - your thinking happens before anything makes its way onto your list. For me, the list itself is at least as much of a thinking tool as an execution tool.
October 17, 2019 at 17:28 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Seraphim:
I'm not getting on very well at the moment with SNL for a variety of reasons. These include:
1) As Chris has pointed out this isn't really a No-List system at all. The current day's list is in fact a "Daily Open List". http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2016/1/27/types-of-lists-iii-the-daily-open-list.html . Daily Open Lists have never been my favourite type of list, probably because I always seem to end the day with the most important stuff undone..
2) I find that having to write out everything on my mind on a daily basis is alarmingly similar to what happens when I change from one system to another. Writing it all out again for a new system destroys the maturity of the list.
3) I've only got two back days as the moment but I get irritated at not being able to access them as often as I want during the day. That means I end up duplicating a lot of stuff on the current page. It doesn't have an easy flow for me.
I appreciate that this is very different from your experience, and I'm not trying to denigrate that experience. Just that it doesn't seem to be suiting me very well.
I'm not getting on very well at the moment with SNL for a variety of reasons. These include:
1) As Chris has pointed out this isn't really a No-List system at all. The current day's list is in fact a "Daily Open List". http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2016/1/27/types-of-lists-iii-the-daily-open-list.html . Daily Open Lists have never been my favourite type of list, probably because I always seem to end the day with the most important stuff undone..
2) I find that having to write out everything on my mind on a daily basis is alarmingly similar to what happens when I change from one system to another. Writing it all out again for a new system destroys the maturity of the list.
3) I've only got two back days as the moment but I get irritated at not being able to access them as often as I want during the day. That means I end up duplicating a lot of stuff on the current page. It doesn't have an easy flow for me.
I appreciate that this is very different from your experience, and I'm not trying to denigrate that experience. Just that it doesn't seem to be suiting me very well.
October 17, 2019 at 18:54 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark -
<< I'm not getting on very well at the moment with SNL for a variety of reasons. >>
Somehow I kind of expected this. I developed SNL as a result of finding that Simple Scanning could not keep up with my combination of environmental factors and working habits. SNL is specifically designed to find a way to discover where one should focus in a chaotic/emergent environment. Simple Scanning can do the same thing, unless it is overloaded. Since you have a very strong intuition for your overall load of commitments, you are able to use Simple Scanning very effectively, and the SNL rules just feel like extra work.
Does that summary ring true for you? Or is it off somewhere?
I'm very interested in your answers, since this discussion has sparked some ideas in my mind of why different systems work better for different people, and I'd like to develop/test my hypothesis. 🙂
<< The current day's list is in fact a "Daily Open List". >>
The characteristics of a Daily Open List don't really fit how the Today List works for me. In your blog post on this kind of list, you wrote << The idea is to keep the list short enough for you to be reasonably confident of finishing by the end of the day. >> But that never comes into play for me. I just write down whatever stands out in my mind - sometimes prompted by a question, sometimes not. I suppose if the prompt-question were << What should I get done by end of day? >> then it might have this kind of result.
Other characteristics also don't seem to fit, at least for me.
<< The problem with this type of list is that there is a grave temptation to keep adding trivial tasks in order to avoid dealing with the more difficult and challenging tasks. >>
That never seems to happen to me. I do find myself clearing out smaller tasks quickly, and then focusing on the larger tasks, but that process doesn't devolve into avoiding the more challenging tasks.
As you wrote, you already recognize that my experience with it is different. I'm not objecting to your observations or experiences, just trying to understand the dynamics that give such different results.
<< The result is that one often ends the day with the most important things still undone. >>
The opposite is true for me.
<< I find that having to write out everything on my mind on a daily basis is alarmingly similar to what happens when I change from one system to another. Writing it all out again for a new system destroys the maturity of the list. >>
Over a longer period of time, I think you'd find that the older pages develop the same kind of maturity that Simple Scanning produces, with attenuation and clumping and other similar effects.
<< I've only got two back days as the moment but I get irritated at not being able to access them as often as I want during the day. >>
Does this mean you keep finding other things on your Today list that stand out, and thus prevent you from cycling back to the older pages? For me, if I was getting an annoying feeling that I am not seeing the older tasks enough, that feeling is enough to prevent anything on the Today page from standing out, and I'd immediately start cycling through those older pages and find those older tasks. So again I am wondering about the dynamics that make it different for you.
<< That means I end up duplicating a lot of stuff on the current page. >>
The only things I duplicate are the things that are top-of-mind but happen to exist on older pages already. Putting them on the Today page again, because they are top-of-mind, helps me stay in a flow that's focused on those things. It doesn't bother me that they already exist somewhere else on the list.
<< It doesn't have an easy flow for me. >>
I am guessing it is something like this. Whenever I started up using Simple Scanning, it would work very well for me, for maybe a week or two. I found it to be a great support for my intuition, and I could offload many things from my mind to the list. This freed my mind from having to hold all that in my head, and allowed me to work in a very meditative state of flow -- very engaged, and getting lots done, and following a very calm and steady flow. It's almost like a symbiotic relationship between the list and the mind, though perhaps that is overstating it.
This would work very well until the list started growing too long and I lost my sense of intuitive engagement with the list. This created more and more disruption to the flow, and a growing sense of anxiety that the right things were not getting done.
SNL works differently by always starting with a blank-slate, going with whatever is on my mind, with wherever I feel intuitively I need to focus at the moment. This is the central dynamic, just like any other no-list system. It also creates a strong sense of flow, but a different kind -- less meditative, and perhaps more cognitively demanding. This has pluses and minuses. If the Simple Scanning flow works really well for you, I can see how the SNL flow could be somewhat annoying.
Anyway, does any of that make sense when comparing your experience?
I'm wondering if this points to how/why different systems work so well for different people. When people ask me about what system to use, I often find myself recommending (1) DIT, but if you run into problems with overload, flow, or feeling restricted, then (2) Simple Scanning, but if you still run into problems with overload or flow, then (3) Serial No-List. It's interesting how this seems to align with the Cynefin framework of simple/complicated, then moving to complex/emergent and finally chaotic/emergent. Different systems for different environments.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynefin_framework
And then I start wondering, is it possible to develop a single time management framework that handles all of these domains automatically, helping you find your level and your optimum model, but adjusting as your environment changes. That would be pretty cool. 🙂
<< I'm not getting on very well at the moment with SNL for a variety of reasons. >>
Somehow I kind of expected this. I developed SNL as a result of finding that Simple Scanning could not keep up with my combination of environmental factors and working habits. SNL is specifically designed to find a way to discover where one should focus in a chaotic/emergent environment. Simple Scanning can do the same thing, unless it is overloaded. Since you have a very strong intuition for your overall load of commitments, you are able to use Simple Scanning very effectively, and the SNL rules just feel like extra work.
Does that summary ring true for you? Or is it off somewhere?
I'm very interested in your answers, since this discussion has sparked some ideas in my mind of why different systems work better for different people, and I'd like to develop/test my hypothesis. 🙂
<< The current day's list is in fact a "Daily Open List". >>
The characteristics of a Daily Open List don't really fit how the Today List works for me. In your blog post on this kind of list, you wrote << The idea is to keep the list short enough for you to be reasonably confident of finishing by the end of the day. >> But that never comes into play for me. I just write down whatever stands out in my mind - sometimes prompted by a question, sometimes not. I suppose if the prompt-question were << What should I get done by end of day? >> then it might have this kind of result.
Other characteristics also don't seem to fit, at least for me.
<< The problem with this type of list is that there is a grave temptation to keep adding trivial tasks in order to avoid dealing with the more difficult and challenging tasks. >>
That never seems to happen to me. I do find myself clearing out smaller tasks quickly, and then focusing on the larger tasks, but that process doesn't devolve into avoiding the more challenging tasks.
As you wrote, you already recognize that my experience with it is different. I'm not objecting to your observations or experiences, just trying to understand the dynamics that give such different results.
<< The result is that one often ends the day with the most important things still undone. >>
The opposite is true for me.
<< I find that having to write out everything on my mind on a daily basis is alarmingly similar to what happens when I change from one system to another. Writing it all out again for a new system destroys the maturity of the list. >>
Over a longer period of time, I think you'd find that the older pages develop the same kind of maturity that Simple Scanning produces, with attenuation and clumping and other similar effects.
<< I've only got two back days as the moment but I get irritated at not being able to access them as often as I want during the day. >>
Does this mean you keep finding other things on your Today list that stand out, and thus prevent you from cycling back to the older pages? For me, if I was getting an annoying feeling that I am not seeing the older tasks enough, that feeling is enough to prevent anything on the Today page from standing out, and I'd immediately start cycling through those older pages and find those older tasks. So again I am wondering about the dynamics that make it different for you.
<< That means I end up duplicating a lot of stuff on the current page. >>
The only things I duplicate are the things that are top-of-mind but happen to exist on older pages already. Putting them on the Today page again, because they are top-of-mind, helps me stay in a flow that's focused on those things. It doesn't bother me that they already exist somewhere else on the list.
<< It doesn't have an easy flow for me. >>
I am guessing it is something like this. Whenever I started up using Simple Scanning, it would work very well for me, for maybe a week or two. I found it to be a great support for my intuition, and I could offload many things from my mind to the list. This freed my mind from having to hold all that in my head, and allowed me to work in a very meditative state of flow -- very engaged, and getting lots done, and following a very calm and steady flow. It's almost like a symbiotic relationship between the list and the mind, though perhaps that is overstating it.
This would work very well until the list started growing too long and I lost my sense of intuitive engagement with the list. This created more and more disruption to the flow, and a growing sense of anxiety that the right things were not getting done.
SNL works differently by always starting with a blank-slate, going with whatever is on my mind, with wherever I feel intuitively I need to focus at the moment. This is the central dynamic, just like any other no-list system. It also creates a strong sense of flow, but a different kind -- less meditative, and perhaps more cognitively demanding. This has pluses and minuses. If the Simple Scanning flow works really well for you, I can see how the SNL flow could be somewhat annoying.
Anyway, does any of that make sense when comparing your experience?
I'm wondering if this points to how/why different systems work so well for different people. When people ask me about what system to use, I often find myself recommending (1) DIT, but if you run into problems with overload, flow, or feeling restricted, then (2) Simple Scanning, but if you still run into problems with overload or flow, then (3) Serial No-List. It's interesting how this seems to align with the Cynefin framework of simple/complicated, then moving to complex/emergent and finally chaotic/emergent. Different systems for different environments.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynefin_framework
And then I start wondering, is it possible to develop a single time management framework that handles all of these domains automatically, helping you find your level and your optimum model, but adjusting as your environment changes. That would be pretty cool. 🙂
October 19, 2019 at 17:09 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Thanks for your reply Seraphim. I think it is definitely the case that different people use lists in different ways because people are different and have different approaches to commitment and to tackling uncomfortable work. Lists are tools to facilitate those so it shouldn't be a surprise that the same tools get used and abused in different ways. We are products of upbringing, social influence and habit and in my experience it is those which dominate how a person will manage their workload, not the tools use.
The approach I've taken is therefore to try and correct my faulty habits rather than try to paper over them with a productivity system that purports to work things out for me. In doing so I learned a lot about myself and why I approach some things the way I do. I no longer need or want a productivity system, by which I mean a database of tasks with an algorithmic ruleset telling me how to interact with them.
S: "I use the list *to help me decide what matters*"
I understand. I'm not criticising that by the way. In my own experience I've found that having everything on a list to decide what matters really clouds my thinking as I mentally step over things that are irrelevant to get to things that matter. My faulty habits loved it; it gave me a way to feel productive while in fact getting nothing of note done. This just kicked the problem further down the road and eventually it would fall apart under the weight of tens of hundreds of items of clutter.
I don't do all decision making "off list" and I do capture things into notes as needed. It's not a sterile place where only stuff that matters is allowed. But it's definitely not a catch-all that needs me to invoke any kind of standing out process in order to work out what I need to do. Generally it's on the list because I've worked out what I need to do, which in turn for me is a process that is informed by life circumstances and wider objectives and not catch-all lists.
S: "As I've said many times, 80-90% of the time is focused on the Today page."
In the past when I was using a catch-all list, 90% of the time I was focused on the most recent stuff, with older stuff festering away. This showed me what a waste of time it was to capture that stuff in the first place. I could keep it pruned with some effort but I found the mental costs and time costs of this maintenance too high. I had to keep asking myself "hang on, what was this again?" and my thinking was flip-flopping all over the place. Plus, in use I always had a nagging sense that I had important stuff going undone somewhere earlier in the list.
S: "You are right, it doesn't change the actual pressures or demands. But it helps me think more clearly about them."
Thanks for the explanation and it is interesting. I guess we all ask (or should ask) ourselves the same questions, and I do but not in such a direct way and not as part of any task list. Eg today I find myself thinking what I want to get done next week.
S: "Maybe this just highlights the difference between what we expect to get out of our time-management systems. For you, it seems to be an execution tool - your thinking happens before anything makes its way onto your list. For me, the list itself is at least as much of a thinking tool as an execution tool."
I'd describe my calendar and list as commitments to outcomes which I'd like to see. Your list seems to be a tool for capturing all tasks and a process for allowing you to filter out those which give you the outcomes you'd like to see. It seems we both end up in the same place.
The approach I've taken is therefore to try and correct my faulty habits rather than try to paper over them with a productivity system that purports to work things out for me. In doing so I learned a lot about myself and why I approach some things the way I do. I no longer need or want a productivity system, by which I mean a database of tasks with an algorithmic ruleset telling me how to interact with them.
S: "I use the list *to help me decide what matters*"
I understand. I'm not criticising that by the way. In my own experience I've found that having everything on a list to decide what matters really clouds my thinking as I mentally step over things that are irrelevant to get to things that matter. My faulty habits loved it; it gave me a way to feel productive while in fact getting nothing of note done. This just kicked the problem further down the road and eventually it would fall apart under the weight of tens of hundreds of items of clutter.
I don't do all decision making "off list" and I do capture things into notes as needed. It's not a sterile place where only stuff that matters is allowed. But it's definitely not a catch-all that needs me to invoke any kind of standing out process in order to work out what I need to do. Generally it's on the list because I've worked out what I need to do, which in turn for me is a process that is informed by life circumstances and wider objectives and not catch-all lists.
S: "As I've said many times, 80-90% of the time is focused on the Today page."
In the past when I was using a catch-all list, 90% of the time I was focused on the most recent stuff, with older stuff festering away. This showed me what a waste of time it was to capture that stuff in the first place. I could keep it pruned with some effort but I found the mental costs and time costs of this maintenance too high. I had to keep asking myself "hang on, what was this again?" and my thinking was flip-flopping all over the place. Plus, in use I always had a nagging sense that I had important stuff going undone somewhere earlier in the list.
S: "You are right, it doesn't change the actual pressures or demands. But it helps me think more clearly about them."
Thanks for the explanation and it is interesting. I guess we all ask (or should ask) ourselves the same questions, and I do but not in such a direct way and not as part of any task list. Eg today I find myself thinking what I want to get done next week.
S: "Maybe this just highlights the difference between what we expect to get out of our time-management systems. For you, it seems to be an execution tool - your thinking happens before anything makes its way onto your list. For me, the list itself is at least as much of a thinking tool as an execution tool."
I'd describe my calendar and list as commitments to outcomes which I'd like to see. Your list seems to be a tool for capturing all tasks and a process for allowing you to filter out those which give you the outcomes you'd like to see. It seems we both end up in the same place.
October 19, 2019 at 18:53 |
Chris
Chris
Very interesting discussion. In the end I concur with Seraphim’s take on things, although my present work is not all that chaotic, which I guess is exemplified by having much smaller lists. But I still like the daily blank slate approach, with backups.
October 19, 2019 at 23:37 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Seraphim – I was looking at serial no list rules and Mark’s simple scanning rules and I was wondering if there is any material difference between the systems?
I can imagine after following either system for a while, both would end up with more or less the same result. i.e. most of the tasks on the recent notebook pages and a trail of older pages with tasks don’t need action at the moment.
Or have I missed something?
I can imagine after following either system for a while, both would end up with more or less the same result. i.e. most of the tasks on the recent notebook pages and a trail of older pages with tasks don’t need action at the moment.
Or have I missed something?
October 21, 2019 at 14:34 |
MrDone
MrDone
Hi Mr. Done, Seraphim, and others:
From what I see of SNL, I agree that much of it can be done by simple scanning, or other long list methodologies. For example, I use the Bounce, but spend much of the day bouncing down the today section of the list.
The big difference that I see Seraphim do is a mind dump at the beginning of the day and not worrying if those items are already on the list. If I got that right, I will confess I do that as well and do find myself more focused on tasks important for that day and feel more stress free.
From what I see of SNL, I agree that much of it can be done by simple scanning, or other long list methodologies. For example, I use the Bounce, but spend much of the day bouncing down the today section of the list.
The big difference that I see Seraphim do is a mind dump at the beginning of the day and not worrying if those items are already on the list. If I got that right, I will confess I do that as well and do find myself more focused on tasks important for that day and feel more stress free.
October 21, 2019 at 16:18 |
vegheadjones
vegheadjones
I don't see how SNL's "Put most of your focus on stuff you enter today" could be considered like Simple Scanning's "Put your focus equally across everything".
October 22, 2019 at 14:11 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu:
<< I don't see how SNL's "Put most of your focus on stuff you enter today" could be considered like Simple Scanning's "Put your focus equally across everything". >>
Nevertheless I think this is effectively what happens.
In Simple Scanning the tasks which you are currently working on plus any new stuff that comes up are at the end of the list. These are basically the same as what one would enter on today's No List.
And I suspect that the past days' No Lists would contain very much the same inactive tasks as the earlier pages of Simple Scanning.
<< I don't see how SNL's "Put most of your focus on stuff you enter today" could be considered like Simple Scanning's "Put your focus equally across everything". >>
Nevertheless I think this is effectively what happens.
In Simple Scanning the tasks which you are currently working on plus any new stuff that comes up are at the end of the list. These are basically the same as what one would enter on today's No List.
And I suspect that the past days' No Lists would contain very much the same inactive tasks as the earlier pages of Simple Scanning.
October 22, 2019 at 16:45 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
"In Simple Scanning the tasks which you are currently working on plus any new stuff that comes up are at the end of the list."
Yes, but, Simple Scanning will have you go back over and over the tasks you are not currently working on.
Yes, but, Simple Scanning will have you go back over and over the tasks you are not currently working on.
October 22, 2019 at 18:24 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu:
<< Simple Scanning will have you go back over and over the tasks you are not currently working on. >>
I'm not claiming that the two systems are identical in emphasis, just that the same tasks will tend to gravitate to the same parts of the list.
SNL does require you to go back fairly frequently over the tasks you are not currently working on.
If Seraphim weren't concerned to keep his not-current tasks under review then he could just use a Day List which gets thrown away at the end of each day.
<< Simple Scanning will have you go back over and over the tasks you are not currently working on. >>
I'm not claiming that the two systems are identical in emphasis, just that the same tasks will tend to gravitate to the same parts of the list.
SNL does require you to go back fairly frequently over the tasks you are not currently working on.
If Seraphim weren't concerned to keep his not-current tasks under review then he could just use a Day List which gets thrown away at the end of each day.
October 23, 2019 at 10:23 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
I've been practicing using a single list i.e. not separate lists each day. Each day is separated by the date and a horizontal line. At beginning of day I write down a few things I really want to progress today and draw a vertical line next to those items in the margin. I then will cycle first through the mind dump items, then the rest of the today list and then back through previous day list. I'm finding this a good way of moving forward and keeping focus on a few chosen initiatives.
October 23, 2019 at 15:39 |
leon
leon
Sorry, should read 'the lists from previous days' -- which could also be regarded as a backlog or inventory.
October 23, 2019 at 15:41 |
leon
leon
leon:
I thought of a very similar system- though I haven't tried it out yet.
Work as in Simple Scanning, except that you mark the end of each day with a short horizontal line in the margin. That line is extended right across the page at the end of the following day.
Each day you start by working on yesterday's tasks plus any that get entered or re-entered today (i.e. everything AFTER the most recent long horizontal line).
When you've circulated round everything after the line without anything standing out, you do one pass through everything BEFORE that line. Then back to circulating round the tasks AFTER the line. And so on throughout the day.
I think this would achieve very much the same effect as Seraphim's SNL - but as I say I haven't tried it out yet.
I thought of a very similar system- though I haven't tried it out yet.
Work as in Simple Scanning, except that you mark the end of each day with a short horizontal line in the margin. That line is extended right across the page at the end of the following day.
Each day you start by working on yesterday's tasks plus any that get entered or re-entered today (i.e. everything AFTER the most recent long horizontal line).
When you've circulated round everything after the line without anything standing out, you do one pass through everything BEFORE that line. Then back to circulating round the tasks AFTER the line. And so on throughout the day.
I think this would achieve very much the same effect as Seraphim's SNL - but as I say I haven't tried it out yet.
October 23, 2019 at 18:38 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
This sounds similar to AF1 where you start on the first page of the list containing items from the day before. Then you work round to the first page of the list (oldest) and back through the pages to today (newest). Or I could be missing something...
October 23, 2019 at 21:14 |
TopherJake
TopherJake
TopherJake:
<< This sounds similar to AF1 >>
It's not really very similar to AF1. It's actually more like AF4.
In AF1 you circulate round each page in turn, only moving on to the next page when nothing stands out to be done.
This suggested system does not rely on individual pages, but instead divides the list into two parts: "Yesterday and Today combined" and "All Older Days combined". You circulate round the whole of "Yesterday and Today" until nothing stands out and then do one pass only on "All Older Pages".
It is basically the same structurally as Seraphim's Serial No-List, except that instead of writing out a new Today's List from scratch each day, you simply use Yesterday's list and add to it as necessary.
I think it's important to emphasize again that I have not yet tried this out.
<< This sounds similar to AF1 >>
It's not really very similar to AF1. It's actually more like AF4.
In AF1 you circulate round each page in turn, only moving on to the next page when nothing stands out to be done.
This suggested system does not rely on individual pages, but instead divides the list into two parts: "Yesterday and Today combined" and "All Older Days combined". You circulate round the whole of "Yesterday and Today" until nothing stands out and then do one pass only on "All Older Pages".
It is basically the same structurally as Seraphim's Serial No-List, except that instead of writing out a new Today's List from scratch each day, you simply use Yesterday's list and add to it as necessary.
I think it's important to emphasize again that I have not yet tried this out.
October 23, 2019 at 22:01 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Thanks for sharing the idea Mark, I am going to implement it now and feedback at a later time.
October 24, 2019 at 7:53 |
leon
leon
Mark, I had the same thought many months ago. I supposed it would work out the same, but strangely it did not have the same feel at all. Not that it wasn't a doable process, it just made the system feel heavier.
October 24, 2019 at 12:57 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu:
That's interesting. As I say I haven't tried it out myself, but I didn't get on particularly well with SNL so it might work better for me. I would try it out but I'm currently using something else. See http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2016/6/1/the-system-im-going-to-be-using-for-this-experiment.html
That's interesting. As I say I haven't tried it out myself, but I didn't get on particularly well with SNL so it might work better for me. I would try it out but I'm currently using something else. See http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2016/6/1/the-system-im-going-to-be-using-for-this-experiment.html
October 24, 2019 at 13:28 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Yes, I remember Alan and I were discussing this somewhere, but I can't find the thread.
I found that it worked fairly well as long as I still did my start-of-day listing of everything on my mind, without referring to the things already written on the list. But there was always a tendency to skip that step and just start working the list.
Another thing that seemed important: when reviewing the older pages, do it in reverse chronological order -- i.e., most recent first.
I think I will give it another trial.
I found that it worked fairly well as long as I still did my start-of-day listing of everything on my mind, without referring to the things already written on the list. But there was always a tendency to skip that step and just start working the list.
Another thing that seemed important: when reviewing the older pages, do it in reverse chronological order -- i.e., most recent first.
I think I will give it another trial.
October 24, 2019 at 17:03 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
I had a good day with Mark's idea for a system (above). I think I prefer the feeling of circling around the today/yesterday page as many times as.i want before doing a pass through from the beginning of the list.
October 25, 2019 at 9:37 |
leon
leon
leon:
<< I think I prefer the feeling of circling around the today/yesterday page as many times as.i want before doing a pass through from the beginning of the list. >>
That's what I meant. Sorry if it wasn't clear.
<< I think I prefer the feeling of circling around the today/yesterday page as many times as.i want before doing a pass through from the beginning of the list. >>
That's what I meant. Sorry if it wasn't clear.
October 25, 2019 at 12:44 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
1. Use a notebook or an electronic equivalent.
2. At beginning of the day, open to a new left-hand page so no older tasks are visible. Write today’s date at the top of the page. This is your "Today" page.
3. Write down whatever is top-of-mind, whatever you need or want to do, whatever needs to get done.
4. Scan through the Today page repeatedly, working on whatever stands out.
5. When you stop working on a task, cross it out. If you aren't finished with it yet, re-enter it at the end of the Today page.
6. As new tasks come up through the day, add them to the end of the Today page.
7. Keep cycling through Today’s tasks until nothing stands out.
8. When nothing on today’s list stands out, cycle back through the older pages -- most recent pages first -- working on whatever stands out, till you eventually come to the beginning of the notebook. Then repeat from (4).