Discussion Forum > Tactics and Strategies for Pruning Long Lists
My approach is to combine approaches.
The long list has tremendous value. Contemporarily I have a closed list system in place that allows a steady stream of a small set of high value outputs to be accomplished. My closed list is usually short ("things I can accomplish in a couple of weeks using my margin, not my primary work time" is my loose criteria for what goes on my closed list).
I also use the 12 Week Year methodology, which enables me to have 1 major initiative to take precedence over all thing from 7-8 am each morning (my garage getting ultra-organized is my current 12 Week Year push).
All that to say that at least for me and how my life works, having a set of systems that I use that allow for the benefits of each system to harmonize with the others has been useful to me.
The long list has tremendous value. Contemporarily I have a closed list system in place that allows a steady stream of a small set of high value outputs to be accomplished. My closed list is usually short ("things I can accomplish in a couple of weeks using my margin, not my primary work time" is my loose criteria for what goes on my closed list).
I also use the 12 Week Year methodology, which enables me to have 1 major initiative to take precedence over all thing from 7-8 am each morning (my garage getting ultra-organized is my current 12 Week Year push).
All that to say that at least for me and how my life works, having a set of systems that I use that allow for the benefits of each system to harmonize with the others has been useful to me.
July 30, 2022 at 15:52 |
Cafe655
Cafe655
I also tie my Closed Backlog system described above to what I call the "ElGato Effect".
One of my yearly goals this year is to do my final home office build out by the end of the year. I have invested about 10 years into intentionally experimenting with my office, and have compiled a list of specs for stations in my office. Early this year, I made some final decisions on how my office space is going to be configured, and have been working steadily to make those improvements.
I then use all of my systems to support that goal. My final 12 week year push (October-December) will be to complete the build out, for example. I have several items on my long list that will move several office-related balls forward, and items on my closed list are key items on my tasks for office completion.
Back to The Elgato Effect. (Elgato is the brand of content creation hardware/software that I use for things like cameras, lighting, greenscreen, macro board, mic, etc) While it isn't always an Elgato brand product that I use, it often is, so that is where the name comes from. For each Closed Backlog list that I make, I find a compelling reward for completing the list and purchase it before hand, then it is just sitting there reminding me to focus on getting those items done, which for me is an intense motivation...to have an ElGato Key Light Air box sitting on my office floor taunting me every time I walk in.
Also, this year, all the items I have put into the Elgato Effect role have been office build out related. My last one was an Elgato Stream Deck foot pedal so I can trigger macros with my feet....which has been pretty cool. My next one is going to be blackout top down bottom up shades for my office windows.
All that to illustrate how I try to harness all of my systems working in gestalt toward particular goals I have, so that important goals don't just sit there in a growing long list getting stagnant. I have a lot of those kinds of items on my list, but have tried to find ways to get a pipeline for completing items installed.
One of my yearly goals this year is to do my final home office build out by the end of the year. I have invested about 10 years into intentionally experimenting with my office, and have compiled a list of specs for stations in my office. Early this year, I made some final decisions on how my office space is going to be configured, and have been working steadily to make those improvements.
I then use all of my systems to support that goal. My final 12 week year push (October-December) will be to complete the build out, for example. I have several items on my long list that will move several office-related balls forward, and items on my closed list are key items on my tasks for office completion.
Back to The Elgato Effect. (Elgato is the brand of content creation hardware/software that I use for things like cameras, lighting, greenscreen, macro board, mic, etc) While it isn't always an Elgato brand product that I use, it often is, so that is where the name comes from. For each Closed Backlog list that I make, I find a compelling reward for completing the list and purchase it before hand, then it is just sitting there reminding me to focus on getting those items done, which for me is an intense motivation...to have an ElGato Key Light Air box sitting on my office floor taunting me every time I walk in.
Also, this year, all the items I have put into the Elgato Effect role have been office build out related. My last one was an Elgato Stream Deck foot pedal so I can trigger macros with my feet....which has been pretty cool. My next one is going to be blackout top down bottom up shades for my office windows.
All that to illustrate how I try to harness all of my systems working in gestalt toward particular goals I have, so that important goals don't just sit there in a growing long list getting stagnant. I have a lot of those kinds of items on my list, but have tried to find ways to get a pipeline for completing items installed.
July 30, 2022 at 16:10 |
Cafe655
Cafe655
Aaron:
<< My question for all of you is what you have found to be the most effective methods for actually getting your mind to prune the list, and how? >>
The whole point of a long list is that it IS too long to get it all done. There is, or should be, no intention to do everything. The long list acts as a seedbed out of which some seeds will grow and some won't.
So weeding the list is merely a matter of crossing things out which are obviously dead. Everything else can safely remain on the list.
<< if you do a tiny amount on a whole bunch of things, I get spread so thin that I don't actually really ever accomplish anything. >>
Generally speaking in my experience, that only happens if you make it happen, i.e. by saying to yourself things like "I'll spend at least five minutes on each task" or "On this pass I'll aim to take action on every task remaining on this page".
If you work on the list in the way I recommend, you will work on the tasks that you feel like working on for as long as you feel like working on them. That will result in some tasks or projects leaping ahead, some growing slowly, and some withering away. And that is exactly what you want.
<< My question for all of you is what you have found to be the most effective methods for actually getting your mind to prune the list, and how? >>
The whole point of a long list is that it IS too long to get it all done. There is, or should be, no intention to do everything. The long list acts as a seedbed out of which some seeds will grow and some won't.
So weeding the list is merely a matter of crossing things out which are obviously dead. Everything else can safely remain on the list.
<< if you do a tiny amount on a whole bunch of things, I get spread so thin that I don't actually really ever accomplish anything. >>
Generally speaking in my experience, that only happens if you make it happen, i.e. by saying to yourself things like "I'll spend at least five minutes on each task" or "On this pass I'll aim to take action on every task remaining on this page".
If you work on the list in the way I recommend, you will work on the tasks that you feel like working on for as long as you feel like working on them. That will result in some tasks or projects leaping ahead, some growing slowly, and some withering away. And that is exactly what you want.
July 30, 2022 at 20:50 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Aaron:
My usual approach is to bring forward the start point of the list in my notebook, so everything that hasn't been actioned in say 1-2 weeks is no longer scanned. I can always reinput anything I want to keep current.
My usual approach is to bring forward the start point of the list in my notebook, so everything that hasn't been actioned in say 1-2 weeks is no longer scanned. I can always reinput anything I want to keep current.
July 31, 2022 at 2:14 |
Virix
Virix
Virix - that is very similar to how Serial No-List worked for me - older tasks would sort of "fade away" and get less attention. I would read and reflect on them during downtime, think / cull / develop / delete.
I'm revisiting NQ-FVP - trying out some ideas to allow it to get more focus on larger outcomes, developing what I wrote about here a few years ago:
It has a similar effect.
But still, I think this remains my lifelong core conflict in time management. Exploratory tasks and ideas tend to hang around in my systems and lists for a long time, and eventually clog it up. I am hesitant to cull those items arbitrarily because I have realized meaningful breakthroughs so often by letting them incubate and cross-pollinate. I've found so many great insights here (and in other domains like Theory of Constraints, Principles of Flow, Lean product development, etc.). But I am still seeking a more effective way to curate those ideas as they begin to accumulate, so they come to fruition faster, more tangibly, and sustainably, without generating any overwhelm. A constant background tension in my life. :)
I'm revisiting NQ-FVP - trying out some ideas to allow it to get more focus on larger outcomes, developing what I wrote about here a few years ago:
It has a similar effect.
But still, I think this remains my lifelong core conflict in time management. Exploratory tasks and ideas tend to hang around in my systems and lists for a long time, and eventually clog it up. I am hesitant to cull those items arbitrarily because I have realized meaningful breakthroughs so often by letting them incubate and cross-pollinate. I've found so many great insights here (and in other domains like Theory of Constraints, Principles of Flow, Lean product development, etc.). But I am still seeking a more effective way to curate those ideas as they begin to accumulate, so they come to fruition faster, more tangibly, and sustainably, without generating any overwhelm. A constant background tension in my life. :)
July 31, 2022 at 22:11 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Oops, I had intended to include a link to this old post on "Getting more focus with FVP":
http://markforster.squarespace.com/fv-forum/post/2560976
http://markforster.squarespace.com/fv-forum/post/2560976
July 31, 2022 at 22:13 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
My approach has been to remove things from the active list until I have only the things I’m definitely working on left. Those things removed, if they need to be remembered later will be filed under the appropriate project. Such project will be among the active items. Usually there’s only one or two concrete actions ready from that project andI will plan to do those.
August 1, 2022 at 17:00 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
These are things that I have tried:
1. Number the pages.
2. Or keep track of the number of pages. Limit the number.
3. Number each item. When an item is crossed out, enter the number at the end of the list,even if blank, and fill in the blank numbers with new items. Limit the number.
4. Always cross off at least one item with every view of a page. Either delete, defer, or act, or re-enter.
5. Review the list at least once a day.
6. Keep the pages next to each other, together, with nothing intervening.
7. Try to keep to one item per line.
8. Define what is on the list. Is it your universal capture list? Is it your only list? Is it a list of items that you hope to do in the next few days?
9. Take a break from the list.
Some of things I have done for a time, but I am not currently doing. It can be like going on a diet, good for the short term, but not feasible in the long term.
If this is the only list, and the list you always work from, the list will grow and grow. At some point, it might pay to add another list. I find working from short lists to be more satisfying. I tend to write short lists for the beginning of work, for the end of work, before leaving for work, immediately before a meeting, at the beginning of the day, toward the end of the day. Some of this can be handled with checklists, but I find that there are enough items that will not repeat that it pays just to write a new list each time.
Most of the items on the short lists get done. Right now, I am moving items that don't get done today or yesterday and moving them to the long list.
However, the greater the number of lists, the less likely you will have time to look at the long list.
If the long list has items that have to be done today, it will need to be reviewed every day. One could treat the long list as a master list, referred to once a day, and items get transferred to a daily list. Or reviewed weekly or monthly. Then it becomes a Someday/Maybe list.
Some years ago, I did work with one long list using AF for several months, using a Moleskine notebook. However, my eyesight is not as good anymore, and the constant perusing of items was fatiguing on my eyes, as well as causing decision fatigue.
I think in the long run it is best to have a few lists. This can provide variety and balance. Something like a Today list, Yesterday list, and Tomorrow list can shorten the long list. Or lists of various lengths. A really short list of a few items, and other lists of various lengths or time frames.
The trouble with only one list and only one method of dealing with it is that you are repeating the same brain function repeatedly, tiring the brain. It can also create blind spots and a lack of balance, where you neglect to notice things - perhaps because the list is so long, and you begin to not notice the longstanding items. Either processing one list in different ways or having several lists can help.
I also find rewriting lists helpful, if there are several pages with only a few items on each, I might consolidate them, and reduce the number of pages.
Also, I have started using a three ring binder and using loose leaf paper. This gives more flexibility on moving pages around, and I can discard pages. I have used a composition book for years, but I found that after the book gets to over 100 pages, it is harder to keep track of which items aren't done, and I need to skip over pages. I kept an index. But with a three ring binder I can keep the long list pages together.
1. Number the pages.
2. Or keep track of the number of pages. Limit the number.
3. Number each item. When an item is crossed out, enter the number at the end of the list,even if blank, and fill in the blank numbers with new items. Limit the number.
4. Always cross off at least one item with every view of a page. Either delete, defer, or act, or re-enter.
5. Review the list at least once a day.
6. Keep the pages next to each other, together, with nothing intervening.
7. Try to keep to one item per line.
8. Define what is on the list. Is it your universal capture list? Is it your only list? Is it a list of items that you hope to do in the next few days?
9. Take a break from the list.
Some of things I have done for a time, but I am not currently doing. It can be like going on a diet, good for the short term, but not feasible in the long term.
If this is the only list, and the list you always work from, the list will grow and grow. At some point, it might pay to add another list. I find working from short lists to be more satisfying. I tend to write short lists for the beginning of work, for the end of work, before leaving for work, immediately before a meeting, at the beginning of the day, toward the end of the day. Some of this can be handled with checklists, but I find that there are enough items that will not repeat that it pays just to write a new list each time.
Most of the items on the short lists get done. Right now, I am moving items that don't get done today or yesterday and moving them to the long list.
However, the greater the number of lists, the less likely you will have time to look at the long list.
If the long list has items that have to be done today, it will need to be reviewed every day. One could treat the long list as a master list, referred to once a day, and items get transferred to a daily list. Or reviewed weekly or monthly. Then it becomes a Someday/Maybe list.
Some years ago, I did work with one long list using AF for several months, using a Moleskine notebook. However, my eyesight is not as good anymore, and the constant perusing of items was fatiguing on my eyes, as well as causing decision fatigue.
I think in the long run it is best to have a few lists. This can provide variety and balance. Something like a Today list, Yesterday list, and Tomorrow list can shorten the long list. Or lists of various lengths. A really short list of a few items, and other lists of various lengths or time frames.
The trouble with only one list and only one method of dealing with it is that you are repeating the same brain function repeatedly, tiring the brain. It can also create blind spots and a lack of balance, where you neglect to notice things - perhaps because the list is so long, and you begin to not notice the longstanding items. Either processing one list in different ways or having several lists can help.
I also find rewriting lists helpful, if there are several pages with only a few items on each, I might consolidate them, and reduce the number of pages.
Also, I have started using a three ring binder and using loose leaf paper. This gives more flexibility on moving pages around, and I can discard pages. I have used a composition book for years, but I found that after the book gets to over 100 pages, it is harder to keep track of which items aren't done, and I need to skip over pages. I kept an index. But with a three ring binder I can keep the long list pages together.
August 1, 2022 at 19:19 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
Seraphim:
<< Exploratory tasks and ideas tend to hang around in my systems and lists for a long time, and eventually clog it up. I am hesitant to cull those items arbitrarily because I have realized meaningful breakthroughs so often by letting them incubate and cross-pollinate. I've found so many great insights here (and in other domains like Theory of Constraints, Principles of Flow, Lean product development, etc.) >>
If we take NQ-FVP as an example, what happens when one has a large number of "exploratory tasks and ideas" is that they congregate towards the beginning of the list. At the same time the tasks which are active at present congregate towards the end of the list. That means that one can spend the majority of one's time working on currently active tasks.
However the system is constructed in such a way that one is inevitably eventually drawn towards the beginning of the list. This is when one gets the chance to "promote" tasks from inactive to active, having in the process scanned every "exploratory task and idea" that you have.
<< But I am still seeking a more effective way to curate those ideas as they begin to accumulate, so they come to fruition faster, more tangibly, and sustainably, without generating any overwhelm. >>
NQ-FVP makes an ideal regulator of this process. To get ideas to come to fruition faster than they are doing without generating overwhelm is impossible. You're already filling your available time. How are you going to fit in these new ideas? It's like saying "Well, I'm doing so well with tennis and soccer that I think I'll add golf and basketball".
When your tasks and ideas do come to fruition, NQ-FVP ensures that you scan back and review your non-active tasks which are stored at the beginning of the list.
<< Exploratory tasks and ideas tend to hang around in my systems and lists for a long time, and eventually clog it up. I am hesitant to cull those items arbitrarily because I have realized meaningful breakthroughs so often by letting them incubate and cross-pollinate. I've found so many great insights here (and in other domains like Theory of Constraints, Principles of Flow, Lean product development, etc.) >>
If we take NQ-FVP as an example, what happens when one has a large number of "exploratory tasks and ideas" is that they congregate towards the beginning of the list. At the same time the tasks which are active at present congregate towards the end of the list. That means that one can spend the majority of one's time working on currently active tasks.
However the system is constructed in such a way that one is inevitably eventually drawn towards the beginning of the list. This is when one gets the chance to "promote" tasks from inactive to active, having in the process scanned every "exploratory task and idea" that you have.
<< But I am still seeking a more effective way to curate those ideas as they begin to accumulate, so they come to fruition faster, more tangibly, and sustainably, without generating any overwhelm. >>
NQ-FVP makes an ideal regulator of this process. To get ideas to come to fruition faster than they are doing without generating overwhelm is impossible. You're already filling your available time. How are you going to fit in these new ideas? It's like saying "Well, I'm doing so well with tennis and soccer that I think I'll add golf and basketball".
When your tasks and ideas do come to fruition, NQ-FVP ensures that you scan back and review your non-active tasks which are stored at the beginning of the list.
August 2, 2022 at 19:22 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
A few thoughts on this topic...
So, lately, things have been going better for me, time-management-wise. One thing that helped me was re-reading Mark's writings on "commitments," starting with "The Number One Time-Management Tool: Saying 'No'" from "Get Everything Done" and following that with the relevant pages from "Do It Tomorrow" and "Secrets of Productive People." The above passages contain some great advice. For years, I've bought Mark's argument in favor of pruning commitments (instead of prioritizing by importance). And yet, from day to day, it's easy to lose track of what you're truly committed to doing. Recently, I reassessed my commitments, cutting them down to a minimum and downgrading a couple of quasi-serious pursuits to the level of minimal hobbies. I didn't use any formal process for this assessment (beyond a few jot notes). Yet, this pruning has increased my motivation and focus.
Lately, I've been using no-list. But this makes me wonder if some form of commitment assessment would be a useful adjunct to the long list and eliminate some of the problems users have encountered re doing unnecessary or distracting tasks. This assessment could take the form of an authorized list of commitments on the side, a filtering mechanism for the tasks you add to the long list, or a recurring assessment task (like "weed list" but perhaps labelled "commitments" instead).
However, there seems to be some tension between the above possibilities and the "seedbed" approach to long list that Mark describes here. That is, there seems to be a difference between 1. being strict about commitments, and 2. adding anything to a long list, doing tasks which stand out, and letting your intuition tell you which tasks aren't going anywhere. It's possible that Mark changed his mind on this topic. Or the discrepancy here is only apparent.
I also wonder if one can ever get away from an assessment of commitments and have a system make that process purely intuitive, almost automatic. Perhaps not.
For a self-limiting long-list system, I'll mention Real Autofocus (http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2017/7/19/real-autofocus.html ). I missed this system entirely when it came out in 2017 and I haven't fully tested it. But it looks like a very attractive long-list system; I suspect, one of the best.
So, lately, things have been going better for me, time-management-wise. One thing that helped me was re-reading Mark's writings on "commitments," starting with "The Number One Time-Management Tool: Saying 'No'" from "Get Everything Done" and following that with the relevant pages from "Do It Tomorrow" and "Secrets of Productive People." The above passages contain some great advice. For years, I've bought Mark's argument in favor of pruning commitments (instead of prioritizing by importance). And yet, from day to day, it's easy to lose track of what you're truly committed to doing. Recently, I reassessed my commitments, cutting them down to a minimum and downgrading a couple of quasi-serious pursuits to the level of minimal hobbies. I didn't use any formal process for this assessment (beyond a few jot notes). Yet, this pruning has increased my motivation and focus.
Lately, I've been using no-list. But this makes me wonder if some form of commitment assessment would be a useful adjunct to the long list and eliminate some of the problems users have encountered re doing unnecessary or distracting tasks. This assessment could take the form of an authorized list of commitments on the side, a filtering mechanism for the tasks you add to the long list, or a recurring assessment task (like "weed list" but perhaps labelled "commitments" instead).
However, there seems to be some tension between the above possibilities and the "seedbed" approach to long list that Mark describes here. That is, there seems to be a difference between 1. being strict about commitments, and 2. adding anything to a long list, doing tasks which stand out, and letting your intuition tell you which tasks aren't going anywhere. It's possible that Mark changed his mind on this topic. Or the discrepancy here is only apparent.
I also wonder if one can ever get away from an assessment of commitments and have a system make that process purely intuitive, almost automatic. Perhaps not.
For a self-limiting long-list system, I'll mention Real Autofocus (http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2017/7/19/real-autofocus.html ). I missed this system entirely when it came out in 2017 and I haven't fully tested it. But it looks like a very attractive long-list system; I suspect, one of the best.
August 2, 2022 at 20:47 |
Belacqua
Belacqua
Adding to what Belacqua wrote:
There doesn't seem to be universal agreement on this forum of what is on a long list, so the pruning of it would get different answers. Sometimes the long list, as in Autofocus, starts out as a capture list, and there have been various methods of pruning these. But other times, the long list is only those items that one is committed to doing in a few days - in which case, the list would be shorter. Perhaps the pruning of such a list would be if one decided not to do it in a few days, or postponed it, then it was be taken off the list. It could be put in a future date on the calendar.
It is possible to have both lists - a universal capture list, and then after research, deciding, getting ready, put the item on another list which is current commitments.
I don't find anywhere where Mark Forster harmonizes these two thoughts on the use of the long list. In GTD, the capture list is processed. In other systems, the capture list when fully processed becomes empty. So the capture list is like an inbox that always returns to empty. I have thought that much time can needlessly be spent processing many items prematurely before one can know whether they are worth doing. So I have thought this an advantage of Autofocus, that the processing, and categorizing steps of GTD are avoided at the front end.
If the long list starts out as a capture list, I don't find as much pressure on pruning the list, if the list is used as a reference and not as a working list. Whatever items don't get crossed out can remain indefinitely, until it becomes too big to review.
It seems the answer would depend on whether the long list is the list that you do current work from, and what is on the list.
Short lists (no-lists) are likely to have items that need doing soon or items that you like to do, will be finished immediately, so they are satisfying. One could almost do all one's work from them, but neglect what is not larger than the moment. In that case, a long list developed over a period of time is a good balance to shorter lists.
I wonder though if one had a list of current commitments to be done a few days whether that could replace the short lists entirely. Then that list becomes your working list. One could have a someday/maybe/capture list/Autofocus list that one would draw from.
There doesn't seem to be universal agreement on this forum of what is on a long list, so the pruning of it would get different answers. Sometimes the long list, as in Autofocus, starts out as a capture list, and there have been various methods of pruning these. But other times, the long list is only those items that one is committed to doing in a few days - in which case, the list would be shorter. Perhaps the pruning of such a list would be if one decided not to do it in a few days, or postponed it, then it was be taken off the list. It could be put in a future date on the calendar.
It is possible to have both lists - a universal capture list, and then after research, deciding, getting ready, put the item on another list which is current commitments.
I don't find anywhere where Mark Forster harmonizes these two thoughts on the use of the long list. In GTD, the capture list is processed. In other systems, the capture list when fully processed becomes empty. So the capture list is like an inbox that always returns to empty. I have thought that much time can needlessly be spent processing many items prematurely before one can know whether they are worth doing. So I have thought this an advantage of Autofocus, that the processing, and categorizing steps of GTD are avoided at the front end.
If the long list starts out as a capture list, I don't find as much pressure on pruning the list, if the list is used as a reference and not as a working list. Whatever items don't get crossed out can remain indefinitely, until it becomes too big to review.
It seems the answer would depend on whether the long list is the list that you do current work from, and what is on the list.
Short lists (no-lists) are likely to have items that need doing soon or items that you like to do, will be finished immediately, so they are satisfying. One could almost do all one's work from them, but neglect what is not larger than the moment. In that case, a long list developed over a period of time is a good balance to shorter lists.
I wonder though if one had a list of current commitments to be done a few days whether that could replace the short lists entirely. Then that list becomes your working list. One could have a someday/maybe/capture list/Autofocus list that one would draw from.
August 3, 2022 at 3:36 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
Mark H:
<<I wonder though if one had a list of current commitments to be done a few days whether that could replace the short lists entirely.>>
I think this is more or less the idea of a closed list in DIT, where DIT restricts the time scale to a single day.
<<I wonder though if one had a list of current commitments to be done a few days whether that could replace the short lists entirely.>>
I think this is more or less the idea of a closed list in DIT, where DIT restricts the time scale to a single day.
August 3, 2022 at 8:51 |
Aaron Hsu
Aaron Hsu
I was pondering my long-list problems... how they always eventually grow to the point where I can no longer maintain a strong intuition for the list as a whole... and at that point, whatever the selection mechanism, the system stops working.
I was thinking about my overall goal here -- what do I really want from a time-management system? I have always conceptualized this in terms of "getting more done", "staying on top of my work", "faster flow of value", things like that.
Yesterday I realized: I don't really want any of that -- at least, not as an end in themselves.
What I really want is a peaceful and productive day where I can live in the present moment. Sure, I need to get stuff done, stay on top of my work, and all that. But all of that serves a larger purpose.
What I really want from a time-management system is for the peaceful and productive days to happen more-or-less automatically. Where I have a strong intuitive clarity about what I am trying to do and how to go about doing it. Where all the supportive structures and routines that need to be in place for this to happen, just work by themselves most of the time as a matter of routine, without me needing to make any decisions about them. Where I have enough slack to deal with things in the moment, and don't need to capture anything on a list at all.
I don't just want my list to get smaller. I want it to disappear. That's what I really want from a time-management system. I want it to fade into the background and be invisible.
And it made me realize, I already have a toolset that can help me do that. It gave me a nugget of an idea to explore. I'll let you know how it goes. :)
I was thinking about my overall goal here -- what do I really want from a time-management system? I have always conceptualized this in terms of "getting more done", "staying on top of my work", "faster flow of value", things like that.
Yesterday I realized: I don't really want any of that -- at least, not as an end in themselves.
What I really want is a peaceful and productive day where I can live in the present moment. Sure, I need to get stuff done, stay on top of my work, and all that. But all of that serves a larger purpose.
What I really want from a time-management system is for the peaceful and productive days to happen more-or-less automatically. Where I have a strong intuitive clarity about what I am trying to do and how to go about doing it. Where all the supportive structures and routines that need to be in place for this to happen, just work by themselves most of the time as a matter of routine, without me needing to make any decisions about them. Where I have enough slack to deal with things in the moment, and don't need to capture anything on a list at all.
I don't just want my list to get smaller. I want it to disappear. That's what I really want from a time-management system. I want it to fade into the background and be invisible.
And it made me realize, I already have a toolset that can help me do that. It gave me a nugget of an idea to explore. I'll let you know how it goes. :)
August 3, 2022 at 16:56 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Seraphim:
A peaceful and productive day?
I'm looking forward to hearing about that!
A peaceful and productive day?
I'm looking forward to hearing about that!
August 3, 2022 at 19:26 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
< I don't just want my list to get smaller. I want it to disappear. That's what I really want from a time-management system. I want it to fade into the background and be invisible. >
I found this same idea a year ago. I know never capturing isn’t possible, but it can be very minimal indeed.
I found this same idea a year ago. I know never capturing isn’t possible, but it can be very minimal indeed.
August 4, 2022 at 0:05 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Mark Forster:
<< I'm looking forward to hearing about that! >>
Haha! Most of my days are like that already. But they are punctuated by periods of overwhelm brought on by health issues or system overload (which often correspond).
My ideal system would reduce those periods to near zero, while its own mechanics fade into the background and become invisible.
<< I'm looking forward to hearing about that! >>
Haha! Most of my days are like that already. But they are punctuated by periods of overwhelm brought on by health issues or system overload (which often correspond).
My ideal system would reduce those periods to near zero, while its own mechanics fade into the background and become invisible.
August 4, 2022 at 0:15 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Alan Baljeu:
<< I found this same idea a year ago. >>
I'm guessing you wrote about it here somewhere? Can you post a link or two?
<< I know never capturing isn’t possible, but it can be very minimal indeed. >>
Yes, the No-List systems thoroughly proved that concept, at least for me. But the direction I am exploring is rather unrelated to that.
<< I found this same idea a year ago. >>
I'm guessing you wrote about it here somewhere? Can you post a link or two?
<< I know never capturing isn’t possible, but it can be very minimal indeed. >>
Yes, the No-List systems thoroughly proved that concept, at least for me. But the direction I am exploring is rather unrelated to that.
August 4, 2022 at 0:19 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
I don’t know I’ve ever posted specifically on this question. I do know that when Mark reprised his old idea of the Will-Do list (write what you think you will do, and put the list away), I jumped on the concept. I realized that psychologically I tend to weary of being tied to a list as my source of action. And especially I didn’t like having a super long list. It made me feel lost in the weeds. What I like is having a very concise source of understanding what needs doing, and then being able to do that, knowing in my mind that I have everything covered.
So there’s the foundational element of Life Areas to be found in my Pursue all your Goals article, and newer means I wrote about as Sooner or Later, but it continues to evolve. I currently believe my life can be captured as a set of routines, a handful of projects, and a mere dozen non-routine activities per week. Which means about 3 things per day I really need to list out to remember.
My sense of control (which is a work in progress) comes more from thinking at a higher level than from having a complete list of things.
<<My ideal system would reduce those periods (of feeling overwhelmed) to near zero, while its own mechanics fade into the background and become invisible.>>
I concur with this ideal. My present operations have managed to keep this period down to a few days max (cross fingers that it remains so) where I don’t really engage with the whole process. I feel the minimalness of the lists helps a lot.
So there’s the foundational element of Life Areas to be found in my Pursue all your Goals article, and newer means I wrote about as Sooner or Later, but it continues to evolve. I currently believe my life can be captured as a set of routines, a handful of projects, and a mere dozen non-routine activities per week. Which means about 3 things per day I really need to list out to remember.
My sense of control (which is a work in progress) comes more from thinking at a higher level than from having a complete list of things.
<<My ideal system would reduce those periods (of feeling overwhelmed) to near zero, while its own mechanics fade into the background and become invisible.>>
I concur with this ideal. My present operations have managed to keep this period down to a few days max (cross fingers that it remains so) where I don’t really engage with the whole process. I feel the minimalness of the lists helps a lot.
August 4, 2022 at 0:48 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
As an afterthought to my post above... I alluded to the theme of (pruning) commitments in three of Mark's books. I omitted one book: "How to Make Your Dreams Come True." It occurs to me that the "Future Vision" in that book is somewhat akin to an assessment of commitments in that it gives you a bird's-eye view of what you set to accomplish in your life (this time, in narrative/descriptive form). So, reassessing one's commitments is somewhat like rewriting one's Future Vision (and vice versa).
August 5, 2022 at 20:33 |
Belacqua
Belacqua
Regarding the question in the OP…
Mark suggested to add a "weed list" task to the list, that works for me.
Specially, when you work mainly at the end of the list, akin to the manner Mark suggests in his answer to Seraphim in this thread. What happens then is that each time the weeding task gets actioned, the rot at the beginning of the list gest cleared.
Thus, each of my brilliant ideas rots for as long as is needed until I am ready to say farewell for good; hello reality!
Mark suggested to add a "weed list" task to the list, that works for me.
Specially, when you work mainly at the end of the list, akin to the manner Mark suggests in his answer to Seraphim in this thread. What happens then is that each time the weeding task gets actioned, the rot at the beginning of the list gest cleared.
Thus, each of my brilliant ideas rots for as long as is needed until I am ready to say farewell for good; hello reality!
August 8, 2022 at 10:11 |
Christopher
Christopher
Let's hope at least one of your ideas truly is brilliant and manages to avoid the rot!
August 10, 2022 at 16:31 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
I stumbled on this blog post from 2016. Seems relevant and may interest the OP.
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2016/2/23/overcommitment-and-the-catch-all-list.html
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2016/2/23/overcommitment-and-the-catch-all-list.html
August 12, 2022 at 2:07 |
Belacqua
Belacqua
Belacqua
I've been reading that 2016 thread. There is a lot to read, but it confirms what I've have thought - that the Autofocus list starts out as a catch-all list. That the dismissal process prunes the list, so that what remains on the list is current commitments (?). However, some on this forum instead of dismissing items keep the items as a Someday/Maybe list, for review less often.
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2016/2/23/overcommitment-and-the-catch-all-list.html#comment21523812
Here is a post that describes the systems and catch-all lists.
In the thread Mark Forster does not seem to advocate a catch-all list, but in this blog post on Questioning, the purpose seems to be similar, if I am not mistaken, of recording ideas.
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2016/2/4/themes-from-secrets-of-productive-people-questioning.html
In the first thread, it is evident that people are keeping several lists.
Going back now to original post of this thread, it seems the best way to prune the list is to define what gets entered, how is the list processed, and what stays on the list, and when is an item removed.
If one is starting from scratch, it is easy to start with one list, until it gets too big.
If there are several lists, one list can become the feeder for another list. So one list is the catch-all list, but when the item is ready to get started or started it moves to the current commitments list. On the current commitments list, if it is no longer current or a commitment, it gets removed. On a short list (no-list) an item that is not actioned can be moved to another list. Items that are on the catch-all list after a time are moved to the Someday/Maybe list.
So the lists are integrated.
I've been reading that 2016 thread. There is a lot to read, but it confirms what I've have thought - that the Autofocus list starts out as a catch-all list. That the dismissal process prunes the list, so that what remains on the list is current commitments (?). However, some on this forum instead of dismissing items keep the items as a Someday/Maybe list, for review less often.
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2016/2/23/overcommitment-and-the-catch-all-list.html#comment21523812
Here is a post that describes the systems and catch-all lists.
In the thread Mark Forster does not seem to advocate a catch-all list, but in this blog post on Questioning, the purpose seems to be similar, if I am not mistaken, of recording ideas.
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2016/2/4/themes-from-secrets-of-productive-people-questioning.html
In the first thread, it is evident that people are keeping several lists.
Going back now to original post of this thread, it seems the best way to prune the list is to define what gets entered, how is the list processed, and what stays on the list, and when is an item removed.
If one is starting from scratch, it is easy to start with one list, until it gets too big.
If there are several lists, one list can become the feeder for another list. So one list is the catch-all list, but when the item is ready to get started or started it moves to the current commitments list. On the current commitments list, if it is no longer current or a commitment, it gets removed. On a short list (no-list) an item that is not actioned can be moved to another list. Items that are on the catch-all list after a time are moved to the Someday/Maybe list.
So the lists are integrated.
August 12, 2022 at 4:43 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
Someday lists are pointless. Or rather they were invented for people who refused to delete things they weren't doing, but nobpdy ever does anything with a Someday list. AF1 dismissal kind of is similar. It does not prune the list in the manner you describe. It is always a catch all. Only when items expire do they get their page removed entirely from the process and the leftover items highlighted. These pages are entirely things that never get actions and AF1 ignores them but in theory you could go through all these later and retrieve things. I never did. The remaining pages still have caught all things.
But here was the idea: capture everything, and allow chaff to die automatically after a period of repeating consideration. Newer systems skip dismissing because it is unneeded. Instead, delete things yourself if you think them dead.
But here was the idea: capture everything, and allow chaff to die automatically after a period of repeating consideration. Newer systems skip dismissing because it is unneeded. Instead, delete things yourself if you think them dead.
August 12, 2022 at 12:56 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
I googled "Someday/Maybe List." Some credit David Allen with the term. Some keep a Someday list and a separate Maybe list.
In GTD you have a capture list. When you process it, some items can go on a Someday/Maybe list that aren't active commitments. My impression is that the capture list when processed becomes empty. There are other time management systems where that is the case.
With Autofocus, if it is a catch-all list, to me when you write the item down and bypass it the first time without any action and haven't decided to do it yet, that is Someday/Maybe item. With Autofocus, if any action is taken and it isn't finished yet, and is rewritten, that item is an active commitment. So the active commitments and those that aren't are mixed together. The processing step is not at the beginning but continually done as you pass through the list. To prevent the list from becoming too long, instead of rewriting the item, one could put it on an Active Commitments list when action is started, and cross it off. But if one does that, what is the first list called? Isn't a Someday/Maybe list?
Mark Forster says that the lists in his books are not catch-all lists. To me, there is a difference between a long list that is a catch-all list and a long list that is an Active Commitment List, and how they are processed. If one does not have a catch-all list and Someday/Maybe list, where are items written down that are ideas that are then researched, decided upon, set up before being started? If it is a list, what is it called?
In GTD you have a capture list. When you process it, some items can go on a Someday/Maybe list that aren't active commitments. My impression is that the capture list when processed becomes empty. There are other time management systems where that is the case.
With Autofocus, if it is a catch-all list, to me when you write the item down and bypass it the first time without any action and haven't decided to do it yet, that is Someday/Maybe item. With Autofocus, if any action is taken and it isn't finished yet, and is rewritten, that item is an active commitment. So the active commitments and those that aren't are mixed together. The processing step is not at the beginning but continually done as you pass through the list. To prevent the list from becoming too long, instead of rewriting the item, one could put it on an Active Commitments list when action is started, and cross it off. But if one does that, what is the first list called? Isn't a Someday/Maybe list?
Mark Forster says that the lists in his books are not catch-all lists. To me, there is a difference between a long list that is a catch-all list and a long list that is an Active Commitment List, and how they are processed. If one does not have a catch-all list and Someday/Maybe list, where are items written down that are ideas that are then researched, decided upon, set up before being started? If it is a list, what is it called?
August 12, 2022 at 17:37 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
To continue from my last post, one could have a separate list for each stage; so there is Ideas list, and Research List, and Deciding List, and Getting Ready List, and Ready List, but there are now many lists. From the Idea moment to the Starting moment of a task, if thoughts are written down, where is it, and is it a list? What is it called? One could keep a separate list once it is off the catch-all list but before it is an active commitment.
August 12, 2022 at 18:07 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
You appear to be reinventing something like GTD. The list you are looking to name is actually just an Inbox. It has come in, and you haven't decided what to do with it yet. When you decide, it moves. If you then branch off into different kinds of actions, that's basically what GTD is about. Maybe Allen had different groupings of stuff. I forget. But to me this is not a useful division. At most you might want to separate Deciding from Acting so you can spend more of your time on what you have committed to.
Part of what troubles me about the separation is that when you're talking about one task, does it in any way help you to move that from Research to Deciding to Getting Ready to Ready? Or is it easier to just have that task on one list, and the task without moving progresses through these stages?
Part of what troubles me about the separation is that when you're talking about one task, does it in any way help you to move that from Research to Deciding to Getting Ready to Ready? Or is it easier to just have that task on one list, and the task without moving progresses through these stages?
August 12, 2022 at 21:33 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Alan:
The multiple stages of working on something is very similar to Kanban, and I know people have found it useful to split their Kanbans into things like Options -> This Quarter -> This Month -> This Week -> Active phases.
I think for people with lots of ideas or who might be managing a lot of things with lots of timing commitments between people, being able to progressively whittle your focus through stages helps to get things rolling while not ending up with too much on the active list, provided that you have WIP limits for each of those phases.
The net effect of something like this is that you aren't "allowed" in such a system to have more than X number of things that you're deciding on at a given time, everything else has to be either getting done or ignored.
GTD has the flow of inbox -> decide -> do, but there are no WIP limits on DO, so you can have many, many projects in play at once. Now, those who are paying attention to what David Allen actually says about this will know that he expects you to be honest with yourself during the Weekly Review process about what is really an active commitment right now and what is not. If you look over your Projects (representing, more or less, the active commitments in your life) and find that they aren't all *really* "do it now" projects, then he fully expects you to take them *off* the projects list and put them onto the Someday/Maybe list, which actually serves the purpose of the Deciding group and the Getting Ready group in Mark's post above. He then expects you to be reviewing that Someday list every week and bringing forward any projects that are ready for action as appropriate.
When done right, the idea is that you prune your commitments, but the weakness in GTD has always been that people don't do what Allen says about this, and so they always end up being over committed with way too many things "active" and then the only thing the someday/maybe list serves is a bucket list for things that you'll never get to, rather than as a useful staging place for work that isn't ready "today". Someday could be tomorrow, or next week. Worse, I think, is that there aren't any mechanical or systematic things in GTD to manage work in progress, but plenty of psychological release that will encourage you to take on more because you feel more in control. If you can be honest about your life, you won't need that, but I think a lot of us need time management because we can't seem to stop lying to ourselves.
The multiple stages of working on something is very similar to Kanban, and I know people have found it useful to split their Kanbans into things like Options -> This Quarter -> This Month -> This Week -> Active phases.
I think for people with lots of ideas or who might be managing a lot of things with lots of timing commitments between people, being able to progressively whittle your focus through stages helps to get things rolling while not ending up with too much on the active list, provided that you have WIP limits for each of those phases.
The net effect of something like this is that you aren't "allowed" in such a system to have more than X number of things that you're deciding on at a given time, everything else has to be either getting done or ignored.
GTD has the flow of inbox -> decide -> do, but there are no WIP limits on DO, so you can have many, many projects in play at once. Now, those who are paying attention to what David Allen actually says about this will know that he expects you to be honest with yourself during the Weekly Review process about what is really an active commitment right now and what is not. If you look over your Projects (representing, more or less, the active commitments in your life) and find that they aren't all *really* "do it now" projects, then he fully expects you to take them *off* the projects list and put them onto the Someday/Maybe list, which actually serves the purpose of the Deciding group and the Getting Ready group in Mark's post above. He then expects you to be reviewing that Someday list every week and bringing forward any projects that are ready for action as appropriate.
When done right, the idea is that you prune your commitments, but the weakness in GTD has always been that people don't do what Allen says about this, and so they always end up being over committed with way too many things "active" and then the only thing the someday/maybe list serves is a bucket list for things that you'll never get to, rather than as a useful staging place for work that isn't ready "today". Someday could be tomorrow, or next week. Worse, I think, is that there aren't any mechanical or systematic things in GTD to manage work in progress, but plenty of psychological release that will encourage you to take on more because you feel more in control. If you can be honest about your life, you won't need that, but I think a lot of us need time management because we can't seem to stop lying to ourselves.
August 12, 2022 at 22:30 |
Aaron Hsu
Aaron Hsu
I think the weakness of GTD lies in the size of the steps involved. It creates the burden that leads to people not pruning as needed. Weekly review is essential to GTD, but that's a big chore and people neglected it. The upfront sorting task is also huge. GTD attracts because the opening premise seems so simple, but many people end up with very complicated organizational systems and get lost organizing tasks instead of doing them.
Maybe what you suggest is viable if it's geared as a funnel to focus your attention, and it's kept simple and small that you can work with the lists so-organized.
I limit commitments by focusing my attention on the large categories I call Life Areas, and to only set a couple tasks for each. This keeps me balanced and keeps the scope of work small.
Maybe what you suggest is viable if it's geared as a funnel to focus your attention, and it's kept simple and small that you can work with the lists so-organized.
I limit commitments by focusing my attention on the large categories I call Life Areas, and to only set a couple tasks for each. This keeps me balanced and keeps the scope of work small.
August 13, 2022 at 18:00 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
I agree with the criticism of GTD.
If I wanted to have a catch-all list with items that could potentially lead to action - when one has started moving the item forward one could cross it off and move it to another list let's say the current list. One could determine the point at which you move it. Right now I am moving it when I start considering it, researching it, thinking about it, deciding on it. Or one could consider it current when you actually start it. However there are enough steps sometimes before you actually start a project or task that it doesn't seem worth it to me keep it on the catch all list or to make another list.
You could have a today list or short lists and move those items that remain beyond today or the work session back to the catch all list or for the current list. So there are three types of lists that are integrated and you move items from one to the other. This keeps the list shorter.
This works best if you are using the little and often principle. But if you are working one project at a time it might be best to put the tasks under the project and work them together at the same time.
A long time ago on this forum Mark Forster recommended working on one project at a time in order of urgency in order of due date. In such a case in dealing with projects it might not be necessary to have lists like this.
If I wanted to have a catch-all list with items that could potentially lead to action - when one has started moving the item forward one could cross it off and move it to another list let's say the current list. One could determine the point at which you move it. Right now I am moving it when I start considering it, researching it, thinking about it, deciding on it. Or one could consider it current when you actually start it. However there are enough steps sometimes before you actually start a project or task that it doesn't seem worth it to me keep it on the catch all list or to make another list.
You could have a today list or short lists and move those items that remain beyond today or the work session back to the catch all list or for the current list. So there are three types of lists that are integrated and you move items from one to the other. This keeps the list shorter.
This works best if you are using the little and often principle. But if you are working one project at a time it might be best to put the tasks under the project and work them together at the same time.
A long time ago on this forum Mark Forster recommended working on one project at a time in order of urgency in order of due date. In such a case in dealing with projects it might not be necessary to have lists like this.
August 13, 2022 at 20:53 |
Mark H
Mark H
I searched the forum, and here is where I remember the one project at a time post:
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2008/12/24/one-thing-at-a-time.html#comments
It recommends doing the projects, one project at a time, in order of urgency (it doesn't say in order of due date, but that's what I interpret that to mean, but maybe it's the start date?). This seems to be the opposite of the "little and often" principle. However, if one had a block of project time every day, and organized the items by project, and did some of the one's work by project, that would simplify a long list.
However, here is another post that says that the stuff to do one thing at a time is without a deadline:
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2006/9/9/three-types-of-urgent.html
Regardless, if some work is done by project, either as Current Initiative each day, or in a large block of time until the project is finished - this would reduce a long list.
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2008/12/24/one-thing-at-a-time.html#comments
It recommends doing the projects, one project at a time, in order of urgency (it doesn't say in order of due date, but that's what I interpret that to mean, but maybe it's the start date?). This seems to be the opposite of the "little and often" principle. However, if one had a block of project time every day, and organized the items by project, and did some of the one's work by project, that would simplify a long list.
However, here is another post that says that the stuff to do one thing at a time is without a deadline:
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2006/9/9/three-types-of-urgent.html
Regardless, if some work is done by project, either as Current Initiative each day, or in a large block of time until the project is finished - this would reduce a long list.
August 13, 2022 at 23:42 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
Mark:
This one thing at a time approach is essentially what I'm trying now, taken to an extreme. I'm essentially doing all my work now off of a habit tracker grid to work on a set of daily routines/habits that I want done each day. I try to make sure those get done, including a specific number of hours on my single most important project/task. I've stripped my commitments down to allow me to focus on just that one thing as much as possible.
This one thing at a time approach is essentially what I'm trying now, taken to an extreme. I'm essentially doing all my work now off of a habit tracker grid to work on a set of daily routines/habits that I want done each day. I try to make sure those get done, including a specific number of hours on my single most important project/task. I've stripped my commitments down to allow me to focus on just that one thing as much as possible.
August 14, 2022 at 0:44 |
Aaron Hsu
Aaron Hsu
Aaron Hsu:
Why do you use a tracker grid, why not just a daily list? Is there a special reason for that?
Also, you could add a second project task via a Current Initiative, then you'll have task-delimited DIT with two projects.
Why do you use a tracker grid, why not just a daily list? Is there a special reason for that?
Also, you could add a second project task via a Current Initiative, then you'll have task-delimited DIT with two projects.
August 15, 2022 at 17:18 |
Christopher
Christopher
It occurs to me that a list of projects would be shorter than a list of next actions/tasks, and if one wants a shorter list, working from a list of projects would be shorter. One could have the next actions under each project, if one works a project at a time, and then update the project list at the weekly review. Isn't this closer to what GTD recommends? Was Do It Tomorrow more project-oriented (I can't remember off the top of my head)?.
GTD also recommends a next actions list. If one could work one project at a time, and had the will power to plow through each one before finishing, that might be ideal. But life is messy. It isn't possible always to finish a project at one sitting, and on some projects there is moment-by-moment updating. Perhaps working on a few projects, and devoting blocks of time to each would be a balance.
It seems that the later Mark Forster methods lends themselves to the "little and often" approach, where you need a placeholder for the next action. However, there is much to recommend about working on one project for an extended period of time. Today, I just worked on one project for several hours, where there is deadline to meet. I did not need to write any next action, it would have impeded the flow, I knew what it was, and one task flowed into the other. It kept my to-do list shorter.
Unfortunately, the motivation and flow doesn't always come when you have a time block scheduled.
I think the messiest part of time management is the relationship of the project and next actions.
GTD also recommends a next actions list. If one could work one project at a time, and had the will power to plow through each one before finishing, that might be ideal. But life is messy. It isn't possible always to finish a project at one sitting, and on some projects there is moment-by-moment updating. Perhaps working on a few projects, and devoting blocks of time to each would be a balance.
It seems that the later Mark Forster methods lends themselves to the "little and often" approach, where you need a placeholder for the next action. However, there is much to recommend about working on one project for an extended period of time. Today, I just worked on one project for several hours, where there is deadline to meet. I did not need to write any next action, it would have impeded the flow, I knew what it was, and one task flowed into the other. It kept my to-do list shorter.
Unfortunately, the motivation and flow doesn't always come when you have a time block scheduled.
I think the messiest part of time management is the relationship of the project and next actions.
August 15, 2022 at 19:55 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
Christopher:
<<Why do you use a tracker grid, why not just a daily list? Is there a special reason for that?>>
A few reasons:
* The items are specific habitual actions that are repeated over and over again with an aim towards habit formation
* A tracker grid intentionally doesn't have too many rows (habits/projects), which means that you can't overwhelm it with lots of things
* It's non-dynamic, meaning that it must remain the same day to day
* It prevents me from adding "just one more thing" to my set of things
* It forces me to only put on the tracker those things that I feel are valuable enough that they move me forwards in some way towards a future that I want
* It allows me to readily have an overview of progress at a glance, especially over a longer period of time, where it can be difficult to see progress that might be more incremental
<<Why do you use a tracker grid, why not just a daily list? Is there a special reason for that?>>
A few reasons:
* The items are specific habitual actions that are repeated over and over again with an aim towards habit formation
* A tracker grid intentionally doesn't have too many rows (habits/projects), which means that you can't overwhelm it with lots of things
* It's non-dynamic, meaning that it must remain the same day to day
* It prevents me from adding "just one more thing" to my set of things
* It forces me to only put on the tracker those things that I feel are valuable enough that they move me forwards in some way towards a future that I want
* It allows me to readily have an overview of progress at a glance, especially over a longer period of time, where it can be difficult to see progress that might be more incremental
August 16, 2022 at 3:40 |
Aaron Hsu
Aaron Hsu
That is, eventually, if you do a tiny amount on a whole bunch of things, I get spread so thin that I don't actually really ever accomplish anything. I just hop around a bunch of forever unfinished projects, potentially for years at a time.
Of course, the challenge is made more difficult by the desirability of being able to throw anything at a long list.
The two "major categories" for strategies to deal with this would be methods for pruning a list so that you don't have as much on your list, in which case, you somehow get rid of things by stopping any active commitment to them in some way so they are no longer on your list, or it would be a method for pruning the items you actually work on, so that you can somehow comfortably have many things on a list that you won't action at all any time soon.
My question for all of you is what you have found to be the most effective methods for actually getting your mind to prune the list, and how? Let's assume that we're in the context of a system like Re:Zero, where there isn't some built in dismissal process. What's your best approaches and methods for avoiding spreading yourself too thin in the list by virtue of trying to do too much?