Discussion Forum > The ToC Change Matrix and the Time Mgmt Vicious Cycle
I vaguely get what you are writing here. I put some effort into understanding that chart but it isn’t clear at all. If Mark’s question is a new arrow in this diagram, where does it point? What does it solve?
January 22, 2021 at 1:37 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
It's worth noting that this "Push Pull" concept is one that is strongly emphasized in another system called "Focus and Action". There, they start with establishing push and pull as you describe it above, but in a distinct "goal setting" phase, where you identify something that is further out that you care about and that represents something that is "most important". This is considered a separate phase from the *doing* phase, which is where the to do lists would come in. That is, the push-pull in that system is seen as the critical element in connection the distant with the present, but in the moment, the F&A system tends to emphasize environmental factors as being critical, essentially stripping out the distractions from your environment and reducing friction as much as possible so that you almost "take action out of boredom" if you will on your most important goals. This is combined with techniques designed to get you more used to and more driven to remain "in the zone" and focused.
I think a big difference here is that Mark appears to be moving the question in a direction of micro-feedback loops, where the question is asked frequently and in the moment, to drive the ship constantly, versus doing big, upfront goal setting with the question.
I think a big difference here is that Mark appears to be moving the question in a direction of micro-feedback loops, where the question is asked frequently and in the moment, to drive the ship constantly, versus doing big, upfront goal setting with the question.
January 22, 2021 at 15:15 |
Aaron Hsu
Aaron Hsu
Alan Baljeu -
<< If Mark’s question is a new arrow in this diagram, where does it point? >>
Mark's question elicits the content of Quadrant 2 -- the negative consequences of doing nothing.
"If I stay where I am, what are the negative consequences?"
"If inertia takes over and I do nothing, what will be the result?"
"What is the cost of continued inaction/delay?"
So I guess you could say Mark's question is like the arrow that leads you from Quadrant 1 to Quadrant 2.
<< What does it solve? >>
The negative consequences of doing nothing prompt us to formulate a solution. Quadrant 3 represents the solution.
In practice, when we think of all the things we need to do, I think we are usually just jumping straight to the solution -- we jump straight to Quadrant 3 -- we start articulating actions, tasks, projects, goals.
Quadrant 2 is just skipped, or it is assumed implicitly.
Mark's question helps bring the actual problem into sharper focus, before we jump to articulating solutions.
<< If Mark’s question is a new arrow in this diagram, where does it point? >>
Mark's question elicits the content of Quadrant 2 -- the negative consequences of doing nothing.
"If I stay where I am, what are the negative consequences?"
"If inertia takes over and I do nothing, what will be the result?"
"What is the cost of continued inaction/delay?"
So I guess you could say Mark's question is like the arrow that leads you from Quadrant 1 to Quadrant 2.
<< What does it solve? >>
The negative consequences of doing nothing prompt us to formulate a solution. Quadrant 3 represents the solution.
In practice, when we think of all the things we need to do, I think we are usually just jumping straight to the solution -- we jump straight to Quadrant 3 -- we start articulating actions, tasks, projects, goals.
Quadrant 2 is just skipped, or it is assumed implicitly.
Mark's question helps bring the actual problem into sharper focus, before we jump to articulating solutions.
January 22, 2021 at 20:11 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Aaron Hsu -
<< Mark appears to be moving the question in a direction of micro-feedback loops >>
Yes. In my diagram, I am trying to describe four distinct aspects how a task comes to shape in our minds, and the different psychological aspects of how that happens and what response it generates in us. I think we generally traverse these four quadrants in a flash.
I think these dynamics become most visible in Quadrant 3 -- when we are articulating our plans and goals to ourselves -- and in Quadrant 4 -- when we find ourselves resisting those plans and goals for various reasons. The positives and negatives of doing NOTHING tend to be invisible.
Mark's question makes these invisible aspects of Quadrants 1-2 much more visible and tangible, and I think that's very powerful. It struck me as being very similar to the ToC method, which tries to do the same thing -- get agreement about the nature of the status quo, both its positives and its negatives, before starting to formulate actions and solutions.
It also made me wonder if there is another question that could elicit a fast intuitive response to ALL FOUR QUADRANTS AT ONCE -- giving you the power of Standing Out / "What is ready to be done now?" which focuses on Quadrant 3, and "What am I resisting NOT doing now?" which focuses on Quadrant 2, as well as the other quadrants which we haven't even discussed in this context yet.
<< Mark appears to be moving the question in a direction of micro-feedback loops >>
Yes. In my diagram, I am trying to describe four distinct aspects how a task comes to shape in our minds, and the different psychological aspects of how that happens and what response it generates in us. I think we generally traverse these four quadrants in a flash.
I think these dynamics become most visible in Quadrant 3 -- when we are articulating our plans and goals to ourselves -- and in Quadrant 4 -- when we find ourselves resisting those plans and goals for various reasons. The positives and negatives of doing NOTHING tend to be invisible.
Mark's question makes these invisible aspects of Quadrants 1-2 much more visible and tangible, and I think that's very powerful. It struck me as being very similar to the ToC method, which tries to do the same thing -- get agreement about the nature of the status quo, both its positives and its negatives, before starting to formulate actions and solutions.
It also made me wonder if there is another question that could elicit a fast intuitive response to ALL FOUR QUADRANTS AT ONCE -- giving you the power of Standing Out / "What is ready to be done now?" which focuses on Quadrant 3, and "What am I resisting NOT doing now?" which focuses on Quadrant 2, as well as the other quadrants which we haven't even discussed in this context yet.
January 22, 2021 at 20:20 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
I get it! This cycle is only vicious if the forces of inertia stop the forces of inspiration from pushing you into action. If your will to change is strong enough you will act, and you return to Q1 in due time but having accomplished a thing. The role of focusing on the negative aspects of resisting is two-fold: it bolsters a desire to change, and diminishes a reluctance to act, thus hopefully overcoming the barrier. If you regularly do this, you don’t have a vicious cycle, but an upward spiral.
In this case, I think the diagram would be clearer if you drew the items in clockwise order. I get two 2x2 matrix you’re going for here. It helps work out the details, but at this stage it think a circle witthout the side labels would be clearet.
In this case, I think the diagram would be clearer if you drew the items in clockwise order. I get two 2x2 matrix you’re going for here. It helps work out the details, but at this stage it think a circle witthout the side labels would be clearet.
January 23, 2021 at 13:30 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
<< I think the diagram would be clearer if you drew the items in clockwise order >>
Yes, you are probably right. I am just used to thinking of it in terms of the matrix, since that is what we use in ToC. It's easier to see the connections to the larger methodology when it's in the form of a matrix. But probably easier for non-ToC people as a regular circle.
<< This cycle is only vicious if the forces of inertia stop the forces of inspiration from pushing you into action. >>
Yes, exactly. You find yourself traversing the vicious circle, always ending up back where you started, in Quadrant 1, inertia. This tends to reinforce the inertia -- it becomes harder and harder to overcome. You become resigned to "putting up with all the rubbish", and begin to assume that it just can't be any other way.
It's especially difficult when so many of the dynamics here are invisible. This is what I like about Mark's "standing out" method and now his "what am I resisting NOT doing?" questioning -- it helps develop a stronger intuition for these dynamics. "Standing out" alone is very powerful. The "resisting not doing?" question might be even more powerful, because the negative consequences of inertia are less visible than the positive consequences of action. These two together provide the rationale for action.
I think where I have the biggest difficulties is when these are not enough to bring about the change that I want, and I can't break out of the vicious circle. Quadrants 1 and 4 have a lot of power in themselves to resist change, and can overcome the impetus to change represented by Quadrants 2 and 3. When there is a persistent vicious circle like this, ToC hypothesizes that there is always an underlying conflict that drives the vicious circle. Kelvyn Youngman elaborates on this: http://www.dbrmfg.co.nz/Advanced%20Efrat's%20Cloud%20&%20The%20Matrix.htm#:~:text=Now%20let's%20bring%20in%20the%20change%20matrix
ToC has some powerful tools for identifying and resolving the conflicts, and it's connected to this change matrix. The change matrix identifies the different forces behind the conflict.
To get a sense of what I am talking about, try considering some large, aspirational goal that you've thought about for several years, but it always seems to be out of reach. (If you don't struggle with anything like that, then you don't need this tool!)
What are the positive aspects of achieving this aspiration? This is the pull, this is what makes this idea continue to "stand out", at least in your dreams and aspirations, if not in your daily actions.
Also consider - what are the negative consequences if you never achieve this aspiration? This is like Mark's new question. If you are anything like me, this question generates some real consternation. It makes me start thinking more seriously. What IF I never achieve it? Will I always be "stuck" where I am now -- never having attained my aspiration? It makes it feel more tangible. A real sense of loss. It makes me feel like I *must* do something about it -- NOW!!
Then consider the other aspects:
-- Inertia -- what are the positive things in my current situation that attract me away from my aspiration and keep me where I am?
-- Resistance to change / procrastination -- what are the negatives of achieving the aspiration? Maybe it's just the difficulty of it, maybe it's "too big" or "too far away". Maybe it involves a lot of uncertainty or risk.
This gives the full picture of the vicious cycle that continually drives you back to inertia and blocks the aspirational goal.
You can use the material in Kelvyn Youngman's article to put this in the form of a conflict diagram. Then break the conflict.
This isn't necessarily easy but it's a powerful process that has given me a lot of breakthroughs since I started using it a few years ago.
Yes, you are probably right. I am just used to thinking of it in terms of the matrix, since that is what we use in ToC. It's easier to see the connections to the larger methodology when it's in the form of a matrix. But probably easier for non-ToC people as a regular circle.
<< This cycle is only vicious if the forces of inertia stop the forces of inspiration from pushing you into action. >>
Yes, exactly. You find yourself traversing the vicious circle, always ending up back where you started, in Quadrant 1, inertia. This tends to reinforce the inertia -- it becomes harder and harder to overcome. You become resigned to "putting up with all the rubbish", and begin to assume that it just can't be any other way.
It's especially difficult when so many of the dynamics here are invisible. This is what I like about Mark's "standing out" method and now his "what am I resisting NOT doing?" questioning -- it helps develop a stronger intuition for these dynamics. "Standing out" alone is very powerful. The "resisting not doing?" question might be even more powerful, because the negative consequences of inertia are less visible than the positive consequences of action. These two together provide the rationale for action.
I think where I have the biggest difficulties is when these are not enough to bring about the change that I want, and I can't break out of the vicious circle. Quadrants 1 and 4 have a lot of power in themselves to resist change, and can overcome the impetus to change represented by Quadrants 2 and 3. When there is a persistent vicious circle like this, ToC hypothesizes that there is always an underlying conflict that drives the vicious circle. Kelvyn Youngman elaborates on this: http://www.dbrmfg.co.nz/Advanced%20Efrat's%20Cloud%20&%20The%20Matrix.htm#:~:text=Now%20let's%20bring%20in%20the%20change%20matrix
ToC has some powerful tools for identifying and resolving the conflicts, and it's connected to this change matrix. The change matrix identifies the different forces behind the conflict.
To get a sense of what I am talking about, try considering some large, aspirational goal that you've thought about for several years, but it always seems to be out of reach. (If you don't struggle with anything like that, then you don't need this tool!)
What are the positive aspects of achieving this aspiration? This is the pull, this is what makes this idea continue to "stand out", at least in your dreams and aspirations, if not in your daily actions.
Also consider - what are the negative consequences if you never achieve this aspiration? This is like Mark's new question. If you are anything like me, this question generates some real consternation. It makes me start thinking more seriously. What IF I never achieve it? Will I always be "stuck" where I am now -- never having attained my aspiration? It makes it feel more tangible. A real sense of loss. It makes me feel like I *must* do something about it -- NOW!!
Then consider the other aspects:
-- Inertia -- what are the positive things in my current situation that attract me away from my aspiration and keep me where I am?
-- Resistance to change / procrastination -- what are the negatives of achieving the aspiration? Maybe it's just the difficulty of it, maybe it's "too big" or "too far away". Maybe it involves a lot of uncertainty or risk.
This gives the full picture of the vicious cycle that continually drives you back to inertia and blocks the aspirational goal.
You can use the material in Kelvyn Youngman's article to put this in the form of a conflict diagram. Then break the conflict.
This isn't necessarily easy but it's a powerful process that has given me a lot of breakthroughs since I started using it a few years ago.
January 23, 2021 at 22:04 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Also, one of the reasons I am excited about Mark's emphasis on this new question, is it gives me a lot of ideas how to get unstuck.
I used Serial No List for my time management system for all of 2019, and had great success with it. It helped me "surf the chaos", identify where to focus, and get the results I needed to get.
As I described in a forum post, the system had a way of identifying and collecting the unresolved conflicts and chaos in the lingering pages (together with the opportunities and ideas).
http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2745088
For the most part, this was helpful and useful. But by the fall of 2019, I had begun to realize that the very same "dragons" would tend to reappear there. This was going beyond just time management, and started to reveal the deepest conflicts and vicious cycles in my life.
I used all the tools I could think of -- many of Mark's ideas, these ToC tools, and all kinds of other things. They really helped! And they helped eliminate specific aspects of these conflicts! But still, a core conflict remained, and remains: how to deal with my chronic health issues and the demands of my job, yet still have time to be engaged with my family and children and do additional things like write a book.
By January 2020, this core conflict started to get seriously overwhelming. My time management was actually pretty much on autopilot -- my system was operating very much like DIT, even though it was in the form of Serial No-List. I was staying on top of my work (my job), and providing for my family's basic needs -- and that was great! But I didn't have anything left at the end of the day for anything else.
Two things have inspired me recently --
-- A brief ToC presentation by Aureo Villagra, where he recommended if you get stuck following the ToC processes, always go back to the Four Pillars. This immediately gave me some ideas how to break this core conflict, and move forward. Aureo's presentation is on a protected site, but there is more good material on the Four Pillars of ToC here:
http://vimeo.com/281213868
http://gomb.utah.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/GOLDRATT-TOC-Pillars.pdf
-- Mark's new question -- providing a powerful new impetus for breaking the inertia of the status quo
I used Serial No List for my time management system for all of 2019, and had great success with it. It helped me "surf the chaos", identify where to focus, and get the results I needed to get.
As I described in a forum post, the system had a way of identifying and collecting the unresolved conflicts and chaos in the lingering pages (together with the opportunities and ideas).
http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2745088
For the most part, this was helpful and useful. But by the fall of 2019, I had begun to realize that the very same "dragons" would tend to reappear there. This was going beyond just time management, and started to reveal the deepest conflicts and vicious cycles in my life.
I used all the tools I could think of -- many of Mark's ideas, these ToC tools, and all kinds of other things. They really helped! And they helped eliminate specific aspects of these conflicts! But still, a core conflict remained, and remains: how to deal with my chronic health issues and the demands of my job, yet still have time to be engaged with my family and children and do additional things like write a book.
By January 2020, this core conflict started to get seriously overwhelming. My time management was actually pretty much on autopilot -- my system was operating very much like DIT, even though it was in the form of Serial No-List. I was staying on top of my work (my job), and providing for my family's basic needs -- and that was great! But I didn't have anything left at the end of the day for anything else.
Two things have inspired me recently --
-- A brief ToC presentation by Aureo Villagra, where he recommended if you get stuck following the ToC processes, always go back to the Four Pillars. This immediately gave me some ideas how to break this core conflict, and move forward. Aureo's presentation is on a protected site, but there is more good material on the Four Pillars of ToC here:
http://vimeo.com/281213868
http://gomb.utah.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/GOLDRATT-TOC-Pillars.pdf
-- Mark's new question -- providing a powerful new impetus for breaking the inertia of the status quo
January 23, 2021 at 22:36 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Your penultimate post makes a lot of sense to me. I have not much to add!
The later post also resonates on a personal level. I don’t have your same issues, but I do struggle with projects that matter to me and those I think matter, and a tendency to checkout and focus instead on fun. I agree that This new Q seems to fit a need, though it’s hard to really.grasp and apply it consistently. I think Mark is right that it’s strongest application may be in the no list scenario where you just think until it hits you and then you act.
The later post also resonates on a personal level. I don’t have your same issues, but I do struggle with projects that matter to me and those I think matter, and a tendency to checkout and focus instead on fun. I agree that This new Q seems to fit a need, though it’s hard to really.grasp and apply it consistently. I think Mark is right that it’s strongest application may be in the no list scenario where you just think until it hits you and then you act.
January 24, 2021 at 0:08 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2021/1/17/a-new-question-for-fvp-simple-scanning-and-life-in-general.html
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2021/1/19/a-new-question-examples.html
I drew a little diagram to try to illustrate it.
http://1drv.ms/p/s!Ar0vV0rbB2kMqEaSHDXXUInOHAQr?e=b7EHzc
It works like this -- we mentally traverse the quadrants, starting in the lower left:
1. We start with the status quo – our current state.
2. But there are negative consequences if we remain with the status quo. These negative consequences generate resistance and prompt the formulation of aspirations to escape the current situation.
3. We consider how to get relief from the current problems; we seek to realize the aspiration. This new potential reality attracts us.
4. But the potential new future has problems of its own. We resist these. As a result, we stay in the status quo (inertia) -- thus completing the vicious cycle.
The "standing out" method of selecting tasks relies on the natural "pull" of Quadrant 3 -- the quadrant of aspiration -- we do want it -- but we don't have it. This is how we naturally tend to think about tasks (given the ease, success, and longevity of the "standing out" method).
Quadrant 3 represents the thing we need or want, that we don't currently have. Even though Quadrant 3 may be attractive, it may also come with unwanted side effects. Thus, when we consider the action in Quadrant 3, we move naturally to Quadrant 4, where we consider those negative consequences and find ourselves resisting them. Mark enumerates many examples in his blog -- these are the things we are resisting. http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2021/1/19/a-new-question-examples.html
This dynamic between Quadrant 3 and Quadrant 4 is a familiar one -- there are countless books and articles written about these things -- how to write your Quadrant 3 goals so they are "SMART" and "actionable" and so on -- how to conquer the procrastination in Quadrant 4 -- etc.
But Mark's new Question ("What am I resisting not doing?") goes in a different direction -- focusing instead on Quadrant 2 -- the negative consequences of doing nothing. This is the quadrant where we DO NOTHING, and this inaction GENERATES RESISTANCE. It is a fresh and interesting approach that is generating powerful insights into the motivations behind my work and how best to evaluate different options, quickly and effectively. It gives us a new way out of the vicious cycle -- not relying only on the "pull" of Quadrant 3.