Discussion Forum > Changed my mind -- like standard DIT better
David:
I'm not sure I follow what the problem is here. Unless I'm misunderstanding what you are saying, most of it seems to be caused by the way you are using Outlook rather than the system itself. What I mean is that if you were doing it on a legal pad (as I am) then as far as I can see none of the problems you have would apply.
However I have no objection whatever to anyone who prefers to use standard DIT!
I'm not sure I follow what the problem is here. Unless I'm misunderstanding what you are saying, most of it seems to be caused by the way you are using Outlook rather than the system itself. What I mean is that if you were doing it on a legal pad (as I am) then as far as I can see none of the problems you have would apply.
However I have no objection whatever to anyone who prefers to use standard DIT!
November 21, 2008 at 14:41 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Hi Mark,
As you stated in your blog about your modification, you do not allow yourself to work on things below the list until you have your current list completed. This is what I was referring to in my description of my problem. So if you have one or more things left on your list and they are large things, and you feel like doing some more one-off tasks that are easier, you will go ahead and do them even though they are below the line you drew?
Please clarify for me -- thanks!
-David
As you stated in your blog about your modification, you do not allow yourself to work on things below the list until you have your current list completed. This is what I was referring to in my description of my problem. So if you have one or more things left on your list and they are large things, and you feel like doing some more one-off tasks that are easier, you will go ahead and do them even though they are below the line you drew?
Please clarify for me -- thanks!
-David
November 23, 2008 at 2:38 |
David Drake
David Drake
David:
No, I don't do any tasks which are below the line until I've crossed off every item above the line. The whole point of the modification is that the large difficult tasks get done by a process of "relative procrastination". If you start importing more small tasks, you will lose all the benefit.
Having said this, you are of course at liberty to add anything which has become genuinely urgent above the line. But it's essential to do this only when it is really necessary.
No, I don't do any tasks which are below the line until I've crossed off every item above the line. The whole point of the modification is that the large difficult tasks get done by a process of "relative procrastination". If you start importing more small tasks, you will lose all the benefit.
Having said this, you are of course at liberty to add anything which has become genuinely urgent above the line. But it's essential to do this only when it is really necessary.
November 23, 2008 at 12:04 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
David,
As far as I am concerned, the jury is still out on this new method. It's too early for me to give a definitive evaluation.
But, with respect to your issue, perhaps some of my experience will be of interest.
Standard DIT has the "Little and often" principle. When I did standard DIT, I found this principle guided me quite effectively. I would put what you are calling "large things" on my list. If I did _anything_ to advance that large thing, I would cross it off my list.
This was good because it enabled me to _get started_ on the large thing, which, in my experience, is usually the hardest part. Once started, I could recycle that large thing and do some more work on it tomorrow.
But, there is a downside to standard DIT as I was practicing it. In some sense there is a powerful incentive to _only_ do a little bit of the large thing. After all, if I do a lot of work on the large thing, I might not have time to cross off every other item on today's will-do list. If I don't cross off all the other things, then I don't get a "win" for today.
This wouldn't happen if I leave the the large thing to be the last thing on my list. But I often feel more energetic early in the day and want to tackle large things earlier.
With Mark's new version, which we can call DINT (Do It Next Time) there is _no_ incentive to finish work on the large thing quickly. If I start working on my large thing at 3:00 PM and get totally involved in what I am doing and I work through till 5:30 PM when I must go home, that's OK. The remaining items on my list I will work on tomorrow morning. There's no harm done. And I feel good because I worked for 2.5 hours on my large thing, whereas I might have only worked for 0.5 hours on the large thing under standard DIT.
What I like about DINT is that it allows me to do more than a little bit of a large thing, since there is less pressure to rush through my list. With DIT there was a lot of pressure to get the list done by the end of the day and I felt less free to linger a long time on a large thing.
moises
As far as I am concerned, the jury is still out on this new method. It's too early for me to give a definitive evaluation.
But, with respect to your issue, perhaps some of my experience will be of interest.
Standard DIT has the "Little and often" principle. When I did standard DIT, I found this principle guided me quite effectively. I would put what you are calling "large things" on my list. If I did _anything_ to advance that large thing, I would cross it off my list.
This was good because it enabled me to _get started_ on the large thing, which, in my experience, is usually the hardest part. Once started, I could recycle that large thing and do some more work on it tomorrow.
But, there is a downside to standard DIT as I was practicing it. In some sense there is a powerful incentive to _only_ do a little bit of the large thing. After all, if I do a lot of work on the large thing, I might not have time to cross off every other item on today's will-do list. If I don't cross off all the other things, then I don't get a "win" for today.
This wouldn't happen if I leave the the large thing to be the last thing on my list. But I often feel more energetic early in the day and want to tackle large things earlier.
With Mark's new version, which we can call DINT (Do It Next Time) there is _no_ incentive to finish work on the large thing quickly. If I start working on my large thing at 3:00 PM and get totally involved in what I am doing and I work through till 5:30 PM when I must go home, that's OK. The remaining items on my list I will work on tomorrow morning. There's no harm done. And I feel good because I worked for 2.5 hours on my large thing, whereas I might have only worked for 0.5 hours on the large thing under standard DIT.
What I like about DINT is that it allows me to do more than a little bit of a large thing, since there is less pressure to rush through my list. With DIT there was a lot of pressure to get the list done by the end of the day and I felt less free to linger a long time on a large thing.
moises
November 23, 2008 at 14:15 |
moises
moises
Hi moises,
Your post was very insightful! I was thinking about Mark's new method in the wrong way. I can see now actually that this will give me more latitude to focus on what is really important without the rigidity of having to get things done within one day. I will try this out some more.
Please keep me and others informed how you do on this -- I will do the same. Mark, thank you too for your answer on my issues. Now with the two of you, I see things more clearly now.
Best regards,
-David
Your post was very insightful! I was thinking about Mark's new method in the wrong way. I can see now actually that this will give me more latitude to focus on what is really important without the rigidity of having to get things done within one day. I will try this out some more.
Please keep me and others informed how you do on this -- I will do the same. Mark, thank you too for your answer on my issues. Now with the two of you, I see things more clearly now.
Best regards,
-David
November 23, 2008 at 20:35 |
David Drake
David Drake
Hi all, at present I'm uncertain about this new development. I don't seem to get it. Are tasks still to be written down in the Task Diary in order to keep a link to being upto date? A legal pad was mentioned - so are tasks basically going onto a to do list now? Are tasks that are not same day urgent listed on tommorows page as in standard DIT? Will it still be just as easy to do an Audit? Sorry for all the questions, all answers appreciated!
I like the idea of being able to focus on one particular task for a longer period but I like the fundamental DIT principle of having one main list for the day and closing it off in order to set a limit.
I like the idea of being able to focus on one particular task for a longer period but I like the fundamental DIT principle of having one main list for the day and closing it off in order to set a limit.
November 24, 2008 at 8:01 |
Leon
Leon
Leon:
First let me say that this is a only suggested modification to DIT for those who want to use it and doesn't invalidate the existing DIT methods at all.
Basically the difference is that, instead of "doing it tomorrow", you "do it in the next batch". Instead of making the list end rigidly at the end of the day, the stop time is more flexible.
As I say in the article, you would know your workload is out of balance if the length of time to complete a list keeps getting longer, or is consistently longer than a day. That would be the signal to carry out an audit.
First let me say that this is a only suggested modification to DIT for those who want to use it and doesn't invalidate the existing DIT methods at all.
Basically the difference is that, instead of "doing it tomorrow", you "do it in the next batch". Instead of making the list end rigidly at the end of the day, the stop time is more flexible.
As I say in the article, you would know your workload is out of balance if the length of time to complete a list keeps getting longer, or is consistently longer than a day. That would be the signal to carry out an audit.
November 24, 2008 at 19:01 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Fair point Mark, thanks for your ideas. Of course I can continue to use the method that works best for me. My favourite feature of 'standard' DIT is being able to set a days work and then focus on clearing it. This allows me some guilt free relaxation when the list is complete.
November 25, 2008 at 8:07 |
Leon
Leon
Mark,
I've been using the modified method for about a week, and it seems very simple and natural-- seems most good things are. Just one question, though. How do you handle same-day urgent items?
Per your book, these would go below the line for today's date. With the new method, the current list is closed off, and the next batch list is already occupying the spaces under the line.
I could just simply do the task without documenting it, but I will most likely forget about these same-day urgent tasks while doing audits of past work (when I start falling behind). These audits really have helped me understand when the same-day urgent items are starting to impede my effectiveness.
Am I missing something simple here, or is this such a simple/insignificant thing that most people aren't worrying about it?
I've been using the modified method for about a week, and it seems very simple and natural-- seems most good things are. Just one question, though. How do you handle same-day urgent items?
Per your book, these would go below the line for today's date. With the new method, the current list is closed off, and the next batch list is already occupying the spaces under the line.
I could just simply do the task without documenting it, but I will most likely forget about these same-day urgent tasks while doing audits of past work (when I start falling behind). These audits really have helped me understand when the same-day urgent items are starting to impede my effectiveness.
Am I missing something simple here, or is this such a simple/insignificant thing that most people aren't worrying about it?
November 26, 2008 at 2:43 |
Ed
Ed
Ed:
Of course the definition changes slightly from "same day" urgent to "same batch" urgent. If your batches are quite short then you may be able to cut down on the number of urgent items which need special treatment.
When I do have an item which deserves "same batch" urgency, I write it to the right of the page. I'm using an A4 sheet so there's plenty of room for a second column.
Of course the definition changes slightly from "same day" urgent to "same batch" urgent. If your batches are quite short then you may be able to cut down on the number of urgent items which need special treatment.
When I do have an item which deserves "same batch" urgency, I write it to the right of the page. I'm using an A4 sheet so there's plenty of room for a second column.
November 26, 2008 at 10:27 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
David,
After further testing, I agree with you: I like standard DIT better than this new version. I ended up never doing more than one batch a day with this new method. So, in fact it ended up being much like standard DIT anyway.
On Monday, I will go back to standard DIT. Of course Monday is the announced release date of Autofocus, so, who knows?
Here's to a productive new year.
moises
After further testing, I agree with you: I like standard DIT better than this new version. I ended up never doing more than one batch a day with this new method. So, in fact it ended up being much like standard DIT anyway.
On Monday, I will go back to standard DIT. Of course Monday is the announced release date of Autofocus, so, who knows?
Here's to a productive new year.
moises
January 3, 2009 at 2:52 |
moises
moises
Moises:
My new Autofocus system (details out on Monday 5 Jan) is better than either system - at least that's what my experience has been so far. I hope it will be other people's experience too.
My new Autofocus system (details out on Monday 5 Jan) is better than either system - at least that's what my experience has been so far. I hope it will be other people's experience too.
January 3, 2009 at 12:05 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
I've been trying the modified system for a couple of weeks. I prefer it, but think it requires greater will power, as the incentive to finish the list within a single day has gone.
Although it means everything does get done, unless one focuses exclusively on the list, the items below the line can grow faster than one is doing the things above it.
Also if a list expands over a few days, there is the question of how often the Current Initiative is getting attention.
I am looking forward to seeing Mark's new ideas tomorrow. Good luck to Mark and all fellow testers.
Although it means everything does get done, unless one focuses exclusively on the list, the items below the line can grow faster than one is doing the things above it.
Also if a list expands over a few days, there is the question of how often the Current Initiative is getting attention.
I am looking forward to seeing Mark's new ideas tomorrow. Good luck to Mark and all fellow testers.
January 4, 2009 at 7:07 |
Laurence
Laurence
I have decided that I am going back to standard DIT and not use your modification. It turns out that I found it to be less flexible. Here is what I mean. I often have same-day urgent things and those of course have to be placed above the line. When new work comes in, or I plan and/or think of things, those go below the line. In standard DIT, those would show up on tomorrow's list. With your modification, they would remain out of sight and untouchable because I still had not completed everything on my previous list. Sometimes also I may have some time-consuming tasks on the list that will take more than one day. However, sometimes, I like to take a break from these tasks and perhaps do some more one-off tasks on the list. These again would not be available because they are below the line. In standard DIT, they would because they would show up on the next day's list.
So...I am sorry, but I like standard DIT better and am now returning to what I know what works best for me.
Any comments from others on this?
Best wishes to all,
-David