Discussion Forum > Resistance Zero: Questions and Answers
I make sure to turn the task or project over in my mind fully, possibly imagining what needs to be done and speculatively planning it out. I consider this "taking some action" on the task, if it's blocked by some pre-condition.
June 16, 2022 at 16:32 |
Ryan Freckleton
Ryan Freckleton
Ryan - that’s some good “little and often” thinking. Thanks!
June 16, 2022 at 17:00 |
avrum
avrum
One question I had is, even with scanning quickly, won’t the size of the list keep growing so that it takes a longer and longer time to scan through the whole list, to a point that scanning the list itself becomes a task that we build resistance to?
It would be alleviated by weeding the list well, but isn’t the possibility of an excessively long list still there? And wouldn’t the fact that new items make your scan longer and may be eliminated anyways tend to discourage coming up with new ideas?
Admittedly I haven’t tried the new system…
It would be alleviated by weeding the list well, but isn’t the possibility of an excessively long list still there? And wouldn’t the fact that new items make your scan longer and may be eliminated anyways tend to discourage coming up with new ideas?
Admittedly I haven’t tried the new system…
June 16, 2022 at 18:47 |
Charles Pan
Charles Pan
<< won’t the size of the list keep growing so that it takes a longer and longer time to scan through the whole list,>>
Charles - I started following the rules this morning, and had a similar thought during my second pass through (and my list is relatively small).
I wonder if this is a stylistic thing - Mark (and many on this site) aren't rattled by this too much. Other than DWM, I developed resistance to all of the long list systems ie AF.
Charles - I started following the rules this morning, and had a similar thought during my second pass through (and my list is relatively small).
I wonder if this is a stylistic thing - Mark (and many on this site) aren't rattled by this too much. Other than DWM, I developed resistance to all of the long list systems ie AF.
June 16, 2022 at 18:58 |
avrum
avrum
re: growth of the list.
I've been doing some meta reading about Mark's systems and people's experiences with them, and one thing that stood out from a few comments from people who tried them boiled down to a long list system making it very easy to get things moving, but with the end result that many projects began to be started and then inched forward, but very few things actually got completed. The end result was that you always felt like you had things to do and were working on something and getting things done, but you may or may not have been actually producing tangible and "profitable" external results (output).
I believe Mark has addressed this in a few comments here and there, but I do think that this issue doesn't receive enough fundamental attention. I think there is an argument to be made that it would be better to have a slightly faster rate of completion in exchange for a reduced overall efficiency of action (filling up the pipeline).
Mark has pointed out a few times that it's better to reduce the total number of "projects in motion" and get Project A done before starting Project B, etc. He has pointed to things like weeding lists as a method for managing this, but I can't help but feel like this is maybe the least satisfactory element of a single long list system. If I'm not using a someday/maybe list (which is meant to store anything that you may do in the future but aren't strictly committed to taking action on right now), then I really only have a single list on which to record my things that I want to work on, but ideally, in such a system, all the items on the list should be things that I can and do want to take action on. But then, if I'm intentionally not going to start working on Project B until I'm done with Project A, where do I put Project B in the meantime? If I put it on the long list, then that will lead to the temptation to start on Project B before Project A is complete as well as contributing to the increased length of the list, but putting it somewhere else either requires estimation (something I'd like to avoid) or maintaining a someday/maybe list.
I think at least in theory, if you can somehow manage to avoid starting too many projects, then you'll have a degree of concentration on an appropriately limited number of outputs, and if you keep taking action on them, they will get done, and if you do this consistently, then you will reach some level of equilibrium in terms of your regular output. At that point, it's just a matter of making sure that you have some way to ensure that things stay off your list or out of your way while you are working on other things and that they have some way of getting onto your active list at the right point in time. If you get that right, then I don't think there should be any issue with the list growing too long, because many of those things will be "inactive" at the moment.
I think if I were to try this out, what I'd be most interested in as a metric to track is the number of outputs that I actually complete and "ship" per some given time period, relative to the other systems that I might use. Does anyone have some idea about how to track this?
I've been doing some meta reading about Mark's systems and people's experiences with them, and one thing that stood out from a few comments from people who tried them boiled down to a long list system making it very easy to get things moving, but with the end result that many projects began to be started and then inched forward, but very few things actually got completed. The end result was that you always felt like you had things to do and were working on something and getting things done, but you may or may not have been actually producing tangible and "profitable" external results (output).
I believe Mark has addressed this in a few comments here and there, but I do think that this issue doesn't receive enough fundamental attention. I think there is an argument to be made that it would be better to have a slightly faster rate of completion in exchange for a reduced overall efficiency of action (filling up the pipeline).
Mark has pointed out a few times that it's better to reduce the total number of "projects in motion" and get Project A done before starting Project B, etc. He has pointed to things like weeding lists as a method for managing this, but I can't help but feel like this is maybe the least satisfactory element of a single long list system. If I'm not using a someday/maybe list (which is meant to store anything that you may do in the future but aren't strictly committed to taking action on right now), then I really only have a single list on which to record my things that I want to work on, but ideally, in such a system, all the items on the list should be things that I can and do want to take action on. But then, if I'm intentionally not going to start working on Project B until I'm done with Project A, where do I put Project B in the meantime? If I put it on the long list, then that will lead to the temptation to start on Project B before Project A is complete as well as contributing to the increased length of the list, but putting it somewhere else either requires estimation (something I'd like to avoid) or maintaining a someday/maybe list.
I think at least in theory, if you can somehow manage to avoid starting too many projects, then you'll have a degree of concentration on an appropriately limited number of outputs, and if you keep taking action on them, they will get done, and if you do this consistently, then you will reach some level of equilibrium in terms of your regular output. At that point, it's just a matter of making sure that you have some way to ensure that things stay off your list or out of your way while you are working on other things and that they have some way of getting onto your active list at the right point in time. If you get that right, then I don't think there should be any issue with the list growing too long, because many of those things will be "inactive" at the moment.
I think if I were to try this out, what I'd be most interested in as a metric to track is the number of outputs that I actually complete and "ship" per some given time period, relative to the other systems that I might use. Does anyone have some idea about how to track this?
June 17, 2022 at 5:22 |
Aaron Hsu
Aaron Hsu
A simple question: does "do at least some work" mean the same thing in this system as "work as long as you feel like" in other long list systems?
June 17, 2022 at 11:41 |
Aaron Hsu
Aaron Hsu
Aaron Hsu:
<< I think at least in theory, if you can somehow manage to avoid starting too many projects, then you'll have a degree of concentration on an appropriately limited number of outputs... >>
Is the problem you describe too many "projects" or just too many "tasks" per se? I think of the occasional tendency of getting drawn to do one-off tasks, some of which don't really need to be done. For me, that was more to be be avoided more than starting too many big projects at once.
<< At that point, it's just a matter of making sure that you have some way to ensure that things stay off your list or out of your way while you are working on other things and that they have some way of getting onto your active list at the right point in time >>
If this is what we should be doing, it seems tricky. Off the top of my head, it seems that some Forster systems tried to achieve something similar: e.g., AF4-3T, AF4R, and Superfocus--with their emphasis on unfinished tasks; DIT and RAF, which give you a sense of what you can handle each day. And, of course, no-list.
Anyway, this probably getting far afield from the new system.
<< I think at least in theory, if you can somehow manage to avoid starting too many projects, then you'll have a degree of concentration on an appropriately limited number of outputs... >>
Is the problem you describe too many "projects" or just too many "tasks" per se? I think of the occasional tendency of getting drawn to do one-off tasks, some of which don't really need to be done. For me, that was more to be be avoided more than starting too many big projects at once.
<< At that point, it's just a matter of making sure that you have some way to ensure that things stay off your list or out of your way while you are working on other things and that they have some way of getting onto your active list at the right point in time >>
If this is what we should be doing, it seems tricky. Off the top of my head, it seems that some Forster systems tried to achieve something similar: e.g., AF4-3T, AF4R, and Superfocus--with their emphasis on unfinished tasks; DIT and RAF, which give you a sense of what you can handle each day. And, of course, no-list.
Anyway, this probably getting far afield from the new system.
June 17, 2022 at 14:30 |
Belacqua
Belacqua
I suppose if you aim to complete things sooner, you ought to resist starting additional new things, therefore according to the rules of RZ, you won’t mark those for action. I strongly agree that one should focus on important tasks to make progress on them and bring to fruition. To that end, I still follow what I wrote in “How to pursue all your goals”, which is that the foundation is
to regularly think on your goals and how you will advance them.
The specific process by which you do this is much less important than just having and sticking to some process that includes this. The more you focus on what you want to accomplish, the lower your resistance will be to the activities that get you there, and the higher resistance will be to activities that do not.
To that end, if you think RZ is a good process to try, and you want to get more progress on things you deem important, be sure to add the tasks to think on these things to the list.
to regularly think on your goals and how you will advance them.
The specific process by which you do this is much less important than just having and sticking to some process that includes this. The more you focus on what you want to accomplish, the lower your resistance will be to the activities that get you there, and the higher resistance will be to activities that do not.
To that end, if you think RZ is a good process to try, and you want to get more progress on things you deem important, be sure to add the tasks to think on these things to the list.
June 17, 2022 at 14:52 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Tracking completed work: Use a highlighter when a task is completed done, (not when it is suspended and reentered).
Suggestion: Draw a line at the bottom of your list. It will be interesting to observe what you select above that line each time.
Suggestion: Draw a line at the bottom of your list. It will be interesting to observe what you select above that line each time.
June 17, 2022 at 14:55 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
I'm marking the page with today's date before I start work for the day, so I can see how long tasks have been on the list. In theory one could use this to implement a DWM style dismissal of tasks that are older than a given time period (week, fortnight).
I've had some reasonable success using the same Resistance Zero algorithm on project task lists and dynamic lists. This indicates to me that it may work to do a Daily Resistance Zero list as well.
Lots of possible variations, but I'm keeping with RZ as written for at least a week!
I've had some reasonable success using the same Resistance Zero algorithm on project task lists and dynamic lists. This indicates to me that it may work to do a Daily Resistance Zero list as well.
Lots of possible variations, but I'm keeping with RZ as written for at least a week!
June 17, 2022 at 18:19 |
Ryan Freckleton
Ryan Freckleton
Belacqua:
<<Anyway, this probably getting far afield from the new system.>>
I think the bottom line vis-a-vis focusing on completion and monotasking will be how well this system will let you do that while still putting everything into a single list, and how well resistance alone can be an accurate metric for handling this sort of thing.
<<Anyway, this probably getting far afield from the new system.>>
I think the bottom line vis-a-vis focusing on completion and monotasking will be how well this system will let you do that while still putting everything into a single list, and how well resistance alone can be an accurate metric for handling this sort of thing.
June 17, 2022 at 21:41 |
Aaron Hsu
Aaron Hsu
Mark,
Have you tested the following: Scan the full list from start to finish (actioning tasks in reverse order) but using "standing out" to dot the tasks rather than scanning for zero resistance? I wonder if you could still get much of the resistance-lowering effect just from scanning the whole list (since that reduces resistance, as you explained)? Or maybe not?
This would be another "no question"-FV variant, I suppose.
Have you tested the following: Scan the full list from start to finish (actioning tasks in reverse order) but using "standing out" to dot the tasks rather than scanning for zero resistance? I wonder if you could still get much of the resistance-lowering effect just from scanning the whole list (since that reduces resistance, as you explained)? Or maybe not?
This would be another "no question"-FV variant, I suppose.
June 30, 2022 at 2:37 |
Belacqua
Belacqua
Belacqua:
<< using "standing out" to dot the tasks rather than scanning for zero resistance? >>
Yes, that's the basis for many similar systems such as FV and all its derivatives. My experience is that "standing out" permits a higher level of resistance than "zero resistance". But that's my experience - yours may differ.
<< using "standing out" to dot the tasks rather than scanning for zero resistance? >>
Yes, that's the basis for many similar systems such as FV and all its derivatives. My experience is that "standing out" permits a higher level of resistance than "zero resistance". But that's my experience - yours may differ.
June 30, 2022 at 8:46 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
<< But that's my experience - yours may differ >>
I haven't tried this particular iteration of "standing out" yet. The question came to mind because your latest recommendation--say "no resistance" once, then do a quick scan--sounded like it was moving in the direction of "standing out."
I found scanning for no resistance easy enough. But not as easy as standing out. Standing out is the least mentally taxing way to select from a long list in my experience. Here, I'm referring to the selection process, not necessarily to how one feels about doing a task.
I haven't tried this particular iteration of "standing out" yet. The question came to mind because your latest recommendation--say "no resistance" once, then do a quick scan--sounded like it was moving in the direction of "standing out."
I found scanning for no resistance easy enough. But not as easy as standing out. Standing out is the least mentally taxing way to select from a long list in my experience. Here, I'm referring to the selection process, not necessarily to how one feels about doing a task.
June 30, 2022 at 13:29 |
Belacqua
Belacqua
Come to think of it, I suppose Randomizer or FIFO are even easier ways of selecting than standing out. But standing out is near effortless.
June 30, 2022 at 16:35 |
Belacqua
Belacqua
Have been a fan of FVP, later SS. But not FV
But RZ might change my view about it
- It removes the decision fatigue w/ SS, bcoz there's pre-selected list. If I don't finish the pre-selected list, I've been coming the next day and finish it, which takes me to the beginning of the list and I do the scan again.
- Sometimes it suprises to see the next task. Oh wow! I get to do this now, finally :) Bcoz the criteria unlike earlier was 'Is this zero resistance', not 'Better than the other'
- Related to above point, since it's NQ, it's ZR task, not must-do task, which artificially inflates my resistance, along with it my anxiety
- Addition: I draw a line (& date) when I start adding new tasks while on RZ method. Or else I don't where the original list ends.
- Addition: I also mark the date of the task completed; it helps me see my progress and also it hides the 'dots'. Otherwise I don't know which dot is done, which ain't, despite the strikethrough. Yeah, that's me.... haha :)
Issues:
- Impulse to do a task now while scanning :P Like SS - what to do about it?
- I get to do only one scanning per day. Is that okay? Or any other better way of doing it?
- Sometimes a RZ task dotted might grow resistance later... Is that okay? I try do something on it, for 10 mins and reenter and move up the list
- Urgent or quick mosquito tasks? Is it okay if I quickly enter it, be done with it and get back to my dotted task again
Once again, thanks Mark
But RZ might change my view about it
- It removes the decision fatigue w/ SS, bcoz there's pre-selected list. If I don't finish the pre-selected list, I've been coming the next day and finish it, which takes me to the beginning of the list and I do the scan again.
- Sometimes it suprises to see the next task. Oh wow! I get to do this now, finally :) Bcoz the criteria unlike earlier was 'Is this zero resistance', not 'Better than the other'
- Related to above point, since it's NQ, it's ZR task, not must-do task, which artificially inflates my resistance, along with it my anxiety
- Addition: I draw a line (& date) when I start adding new tasks while on RZ method. Or else I don't where the original list ends.
- Addition: I also mark the date of the task completed; it helps me see my progress and also it hides the 'dots'. Otherwise I don't know which dot is done, which ain't, despite the strikethrough. Yeah, that's me.... haha :)
Issues:
- Impulse to do a task now while scanning :P Like SS - what to do about it?
- I get to do only one scanning per day. Is that okay? Or any other better way of doing it?
- Sometimes a RZ task dotted might grow resistance later... Is that okay? I try do something on it, for 10 mins and reenter and move up the list
- Urgent or quick mosquito tasks? Is it okay if I quickly enter it, be done with it and get back to my dotted task again
Once again, thanks Mark
July 6, 2022 at 13:42 |
Sathya
Sathya
Issues, my suggestions:
- Scan very very quickly so you don’t feel a chance to do anything as you’re scanning.
- it might be okay. I’d suggest review the total list for how long it might take to do it all. Make sure it fits a day or less than. You can always be deliberate and shorten how long you work a thing so it all fits. Refer to the 30,60,90 post.
- I think it’s best to make yourself do a dotted task you no longer want to do, even if it’s just a tiny progression. Even far less than 10 minutes maybe, just make it a meaningful advance. Then reenter.
- Short interruptions are fine Mark has always averred.
- Scan very very quickly so you don’t feel a chance to do anything as you’re scanning.
- it might be okay. I’d suggest review the total list for how long it might take to do it all. Make sure it fits a day or less than. You can always be deliberate and shorten how long you work a thing so it all fits. Refer to the 30,60,90 post.
- I think it’s best to make yourself do a dotted task you no longer want to do, even if it’s just a tiny progression. Even far less than 10 minutes maybe, just make it a meaningful advance. Then reenter.
- Short interruptions are fine Mark has always averred.
July 7, 2022 at 1:21 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Thanks Alan for the suggestions.
Appreciate it.
If you don't mind, can you share the link to the 30,60,90 post?
I don't get it...
Appreciate it.
If you don't mind, can you share the link to the 30,60,90 post?
I don't get it...
July 9, 2022 at 16:21 |
Sathya
Sathya
It's currently at the top of the Discussion Forum, but for future reference: http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2790336
July 9, 2022 at 16:28 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
I posted this on the blog site, but realized it might be better here:
I'm just seeing RZ for the first time today. Very intriguing. Thanks Mark.
I'm going to give this a try, but I am curious how effective this is at dealing with urgent tasks/projects. Suppose I have two hairy projects that need my attention but that I really don't want to do—that is, resistance is really high. I don't have the luxury of scanning through my list selecting 10 other items of lesser urgency and doing those 10 first. I absolutely need to finish those two projects as soon as possible.
One benefit of the question "standing out as being ready to be done" is that tasks that you don't want to do but need to do get dotted. I may have force myself in varying degrees to start on them, but I at least do them and make progress to getting those urgent projects out the door. How does "zero resistance" take into account things you don't want to do but know you need to do now? Perhaps there's more nuance to zero resistance than I realize. Zero resistance just seems like a fundamentally different instruction that standing out.
Also with the two projects, one of the benefits of SS is that you can alternate those two projects at the end of the list, and bounce back and forth until they are done. How would something like that work with ZR? Would it look like a scan of the whole list, selecting just those two projects and working on them, then another scan of the list, selecting just those projects again and working on them, and on and on?
I don't know if I saw the answer to the question: what happens if something blows up the original dotted list mid-work (e.g. priorities change, resistance changes because you're now more tired, have less time, etc.)?
Regardless, I'm going to give this a try. This seems like a worthy challenger to SS for me.
I'm just seeing RZ for the first time today. Very intriguing. Thanks Mark.
I'm going to give this a try, but I am curious how effective this is at dealing with urgent tasks/projects. Suppose I have two hairy projects that need my attention but that I really don't want to do—that is, resistance is really high. I don't have the luxury of scanning through my list selecting 10 other items of lesser urgency and doing those 10 first. I absolutely need to finish those two projects as soon as possible.
One benefit of the question "standing out as being ready to be done" is that tasks that you don't want to do but need to do get dotted. I may have force myself in varying degrees to start on them, but I at least do them and make progress to getting those urgent projects out the door. How does "zero resistance" take into account things you don't want to do but know you need to do now? Perhaps there's more nuance to zero resistance than I realize. Zero resistance just seems like a fundamentally different instruction that standing out.
Also with the two projects, one of the benefits of SS is that you can alternate those two projects at the end of the list, and bounce back and forth until they are done. How would something like that work with ZR? Would it look like a scan of the whole list, selecting just those two projects and working on them, then another scan of the list, selecting just those projects again and working on them, and on and on?
I don't know if I saw the answer to the question: what happens if something blows up the original dotted list mid-work (e.g. priorities change, resistance changes because you're now more tired, have less time, etc.)?
Regardless, I'm going to give this a try. This seems like a worthy challenger to SS for me.
July 11, 2022 at 16:47 |
Cameron
Cameron
Cameron:
<< Suppose I have two hairy projects that need my attention but that I really don't want to do—that is, resistance is really high. I don't have the luxury of scanning through my list selecting 10 other items of lesser urgency and doing those 10 first. I absolutely need to finish those two projects as soon as possible. >>
Well, do them. No TM system is designed to deal with tasks you already know you need to do straight away. The rule is always: "If it needs doing now, do it".
<< How does "zero resistance" take into account things you don't want to do but know you need to do now? >>
It doesn't. If you have tasks you know you need to do now, then why do you need confirmation of this from a system? This applies to all TM systems and none. Just do them.
If on the other hand you mean that you know that they need doing soon but you have considerable resistance against them then RZ, as explained in the blog post, will wear the resistance down because scanning has the effect of reducing the resistance of the tasks scanned on each scan.
<< << Would it [dealing with two projects on their own] look like a scan of the whole list, selecting just those two projects and working on them, then another scan of the list, selecting just those projects again and working on them, and on and on? >>
I don't know. Try it and see. Even in Simple Scanning other urgent tasks are likely to get included as they come up.
<< what happens if something blows up the original dotted list mid-work (e.g. priorities change, resistance changes because you're now more tired, have less time, etc.) >>
Delete the dots and re-scan.
<< Suppose I have two hairy projects that need my attention but that I really don't want to do—that is, resistance is really high. I don't have the luxury of scanning through my list selecting 10 other items of lesser urgency and doing those 10 first. I absolutely need to finish those two projects as soon as possible. >>
Well, do them. No TM system is designed to deal with tasks you already know you need to do straight away. The rule is always: "If it needs doing now, do it".
<< How does "zero resistance" take into account things you don't want to do but know you need to do now? >>
It doesn't. If you have tasks you know you need to do now, then why do you need confirmation of this from a system? This applies to all TM systems and none. Just do them.
If on the other hand you mean that you know that they need doing soon but you have considerable resistance against them then RZ, as explained in the blog post, will wear the resistance down because scanning has the effect of reducing the resistance of the tasks scanned on each scan.
<< << Would it [dealing with two projects on their own] look like a scan of the whole list, selecting just those two projects and working on them, then another scan of the list, selecting just those projects again and working on them, and on and on? >>
I don't know. Try it and see. Even in Simple Scanning other urgent tasks are likely to get included as they come up.
<< what happens if something blows up the original dotted list mid-work (e.g. priorities change, resistance changes because you're now more tired, have less time, etc.) >>
Delete the dots and re-scan.
July 11, 2022 at 21:20 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark, thanks for the prompt responses.
I know you've preached "if it needs doing now, do it" over the years. I think I've usually only applied that to small things like "somebody needs me to answer an email now", or "I need to go pick up my child now". Something that is one and done in a few minutes. But I guess I haven't considered needing to apply it to a larger project that lasts for days or weeks. In these cases I've always thought it should go on the lists. You've expanded my understanding of "do it now if it needs doing now".
I've starting using the system this morning and so far I'm liking it. It feels more enjoyable than SS, which is surprising to me. Trying to crank though a mini-list from a large list feels less oppressive than simple scanning infinite-looping list. Thanks again!
I know you've preached "if it needs doing now, do it" over the years. I think I've usually only applied that to small things like "somebody needs me to answer an email now", or "I need to go pick up my child now". Something that is one and done in a few minutes. But I guess I haven't considered needing to apply it to a larger project that lasts for days or weeks. In these cases I've always thought it should go on the lists. You've expanded my understanding of "do it now if it needs doing now".
I've starting using the system this morning and so far I'm liking it. It feels more enjoyable than SS, which is surprising to me. Trying to crank though a mini-list from a large list feels less oppressive than simple scanning infinite-looping list. Thanks again!
July 11, 2022 at 22:19 |
Cameron
Cameron
Here's a favorite example of mine of how resistance changes each time you scan the list:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ss9cgThLzT0&ab_channel=extortshorties
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ss9cgThLzT0&ab_channel=extortshorties
July 12, 2022 at 0:05 |
Cameron
Cameron
Cameron: I'd skip the snakes each time I scanned as well. Good illustration of the concept.
July 13, 2022 at 0:20 |
Brent
Brent
For this rule:
== take at least some action on every task you’ve dotted ==
For whatever reason, what if you were unable to take some action of EVERY dotted task. How do you proceed the next time you work from the list? Do you rescan, and redot. Do you start from last item you dotted, or the one above that one?
An intriguing twist on a familiar workflow Mark. Curious to give this a go and supplement what I'm currently doing.