Get Everything Done

Seraphim,

>>> @Simon -- Highway 1 and Big Sur!!! Wow I miss that area. I grew up in the Santa Cruz area. Now I live in the Arizona desert -- I really miss the trees..... <<<

I love Big Sur. I have a photo of the exact house I'd love to buy. It is not visible from the road so you have to kind of hang out over the cliff to see it. Amazing.

But that said, I'd love to move to Arizona. There is something to be said for the absolute silence one "hears" just 100 yards or so off the highway.

>>>> @Andreas -- Don't know if you're reading this thread! But it looks like there's another programming opportunity above! (Simon's post: "How do fictional bank robbers organize a complex plan that has to work like clockwork? What's the mental process? I wonder what kind of software they use :)"). <<<

Been done. Microsoft Project. Plus all kinds of freeware PERT/CPM systems.

>>> @Mike -- I really don't know why this "conflict" keeps coming up. I, for one, am perfectly happy having some goals as SMART goals (when that's appropriate, necessary, and useful), and other goals (oops, maybe "underspecified objectives" would be more acceptable?) that are not SMART (or perhaps, in some cases, not SMART *yet*). The fact that some of us use different methods doesn't mean we don't plan.<<<

Nor do I think that there is only one way to plan. But planning for a goals which is underspecified, as you put it, will lead to an unspecified outcome. If that is what is desired, then have at it ;-)

>>> Regarding "vision" and "mission statements" -- Scott Adams (Dilbert) wouldn't be in business if it weren't for concepts like these that get misused and abused and are perhaps fundamentally flawed at least in the way they are generally practiced. But still, there is nothing quite so helpful in a large organization as a leader who can define and communicate a vision of where the organization should be going, and how to get there. <<<

Yeah, but the leaders seldom have a clue. They do it because someone told them to.

>>> The Exec VP of my division where I work is like that. It helps everyone understand the overall business strategy, and helps us see how our day-to-day work aligns with it. But whenever someone in Employee Communications decides to boil it down into a poster with a few bullet points, it almost inevitably becomes worthy of mockery. <<<

When IBM hit bottom some years ago the CEO was canned (as CEOs are ... i.e. he retired on his millions). A new CEO came in (I forgot who just now, they are all cardboard cutouts) and was asked what his vision for IBM was. He said: "To stop talking about visions and make money." It was funny. It was accurate and honest. The only problem was that it is a flawed vision. IBM has made money in some very disreputable ways and has largely lost the respect of the industry. Most see it now as a more inept Microsoft.

>>> I guess the thing that gets you riled up is the "visionaries" are great at painting pictures and creating an overall impression of something grand, but fail to provide the concrete actions and details that are needed to make it a reality. I think the right word for people like that is CHARLATAN. <<<

Amen to that!

>>> But the thing that gets other people riled up are the "functionaries" who are pretty good at habitually setting SMART goals that attain their purpose, but aren't able to explain (to others or to themselves) WHY this particular goal is so important and useful and necessary, and therefore can't MOTIVATE anyone. <<<

I agree.

>>> A real LEADER, it seems to me, is someone who can envision and articulate the large goals but also make them real, practical, SMART, with all the feedback systems and everything else you mention to make them really work, but also with answers to all the WHY questions that helps make sure they are the RIGHT goals and that people are motivated to work towards them. <<<

There are very few such people. Richard Branson? I think that the problem is that there are so many layers of management that even if the top guy is perfect, once things filter through a few layers of dead wood the all come out sounding like the same old dreary crap.

>>> Anyway, just some rambling thoughts... <<<

Very nice rambling ;-)

Mark,


>>> Which really boils down to saying that whenever we have a goal we all tend to think about what needs to be done to achieve it. Which is very true. <<<

Well, what I intened to say was more than just that we think about what needs to be done. I think we mostly tend to think backward ... at least eventually. We probably start with "what's next?" but then have to think about "what do I want done and what do I need to do before I get there?"

>>> PERT and CPM are project management techniques which are needed for complex projects with fixed completion dates depending on the concerted actions of numerous people. To use them for one's own personal time management is like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. <<<

I don't entirely agree:

- A fixed completion date is not required, but the software will probably require one so you can just make one up,

- Numerous people can be involved, but I can envision a big project involving no one but myself.

- I don't see PERT/CPM as a time management tool at all. It is a PROJECT management tool (as you say). How one manages one's time to meet the requirements of completing the project is another matter.

- I also don't agree with the inference that personal projects are too small for such techniques. I've outlined two of my own which would not have been successful without them. Of course, if you wish to define success in terms other than I wanted, then sure, you can do almost ANYthing and get SOME outcome.

And, for the record, those are the ONLY two personal projects that I can remember where I used those powerful tools. Most things I do are done without software or calculations. But many are done doodling on paper using some of the techniques. Basically, if I can't "see" the path to completion, I start drawing bubbles. ;-)

Mark,

<< Probably what they paid you to tell them was how to put the tinsel, lights and popcorn on the goals. >>

Probably? That's hedging your bets a bit Mike. Aren't you prepared to be completely definite about what I told them?

No, not hedging so much. If I knew I'd say, but I was not there so I can't be definite about what you said or even what they asked you to say. I'm guessing based on what every speaker at every dog and pony show IBM ever put on had to say. Some were very entertaining but no one had anything new to say. I'm confident I could write a template for that kind of event. All one need do would be to fill in date appropriate cultural references.

Thinking about it I remember three types of people in the audience:

- Those who DID things, and they were busy working on projects in note pads as they pretended to take notes but ignored the speaker,

- Those who pretended to do things, they listened in rapt attention to impress their managers while memorizing take away slogans to repeat so they could prove they "got it",

- Those few of us who are contrarians and mocked the proceedings as much as we felt we could get by with.

All but those in the first group saw it as a nice day off. The others resented the intrusion on their schedules. The stockholders would probably have objected at the waste of money had they been consulted.

And don't get me wrong. I fault companies like IBM for wasting money on such stuff, not the speakers who give the talks. It's a great gig!

re: goals

B. Sher has a beautiful section on how to differentiate a goal vs. THE GOAL i.e. the emotional kernel of what you want. It's the ol' Rolling Stone idea... what you want vs what you need.. For example: I say I want to be a doctor. After some self-analysis I realize that being a doctor would allow me to work in hospitals. Why? Who cares... I simply love being around hospitals.I
Well now, my options have now expanded vis-a-vis the emotional center of my goal. B. Sher believes we spend too much time chasing after goals that have been defined for us, and not nearly enough time nurturing our childhood dreams.

As a therapist, I witness this struggle time and again.

Mark,

>>> Wow - you must have a great goal for this morning "Spend entire morning writing posts on Mark's website! :-) <<<

Not so much. I'm watching the clock for an appointment time to get my blood drawn. (I hate needles so I'm just distracting myself.)

>>> "I will have a private pilot's license by the end of this year so I can fly the open country and visit places I've never been before."

No, I don't think you can include that in a SMART goal. You have written a treble goal (pilot's licence, fly open country, visit new places) which contradicts the SMART "specific" requirement. You may well say "So, what the heck?" - and I would agree with you. But you're supposed to be the one defending SMART goals. <<<

Well, I'm defending well-formed goals, and specific is one feature, that is true. I don't agree that the goal is not specific. The "goal" is the license, the rest are reasons for it. I will usually include my reasons in my wording of the goal.

IOW, I would not consider the goal to have been "missed" if I got the license and then did not fly around the country. In fact, as I say, I don't. It is to damn expensive. But I consider the goal successfully accomplished.

I can see your point if your position is that a goal must ONLY meet the SMART checklist and anything added detracts. I don't see SMART as a maximum but rather a minimum, however. I suppose there are valid arguments to be made either way.

Mark,

Forgive the brevity. I'm getting close to the point where I can procrastinate no longer and there is a lot to respond to...

>>> I think your examples of people in the audience tell more about the culture within IBM than they do about the speakers. <<<

Without a doubt.

>>> The fact that no one in the audience was prepared to listen with the intent of learning probably goes some way to explaining why IBM has had the problems which you elaborate in another post. <<<

Someway, but the problems are systemic, I think.

>>> Generally speaking I run seminars for people who have paid to come and hear me specifically, so I don't think you would find my audiences were remotely like that. <<<

Probably true.

>>> I can't comment on whether the contents of the seminars would be similar because I don't know what the speakers said (and am not prepared to run them down simply on the basis of guesswork). <<<

Touche

<< We probably start with "what's next?" but then have to think about "what do I want done and what do I need to do before I get there?" >>

Could you explain how that statement is different in any way from what I said:

"whenever we have a goal we all tend to think about what needs to be done to achieve it."

There are different ways of thinking about what needs to be done. Some start from the beginning, others start from the end.

Re Mike: Regarding terminology in psychology

yes there is a ton of terminology in psychology, I think the main struggle with the abundance of terminology is that it becomes harder for an average person to understand it unless it is accompanied by good examples or background knowledge. And even with this we need other people like philosophers to remind us of the use of words (like the word 'self', what is really referring to?) But even with examples one can always break them down no, you just put up the right angle. Like your response to the million dollar&policy maker example: valid points but within the example the intended illustration, which was also I think the intention of the article is that people tend to set smart goals that don't work, which isn't a direct attack at SMART goal as a technique.

But if the terminology is there to describe something more specifically&succintly and we don't have different words for it, it's a necessary and useful thing. Confirmation bias for example is a great driver for discussion in that every person in a discussion while shine angles that illuminate different aspects unseen to the other party, since they are seeking information to comply with their beliefs and will juggle responses in such a way that it at least fits with their thinking. It does bring out a lot of useful detail, which wouldn't be possible if everybody would only exchange oneliners to the effect of 'sit down & shut up'. (Although I love the oneliners)

I do agree with Jacqueline regarding the use of succint remarks. Losing specificity can open up ambiguity and therefore weakens the intended impact of the words. I admire Mark for his succint writing style but even with his writing there's the increasing potential of misunderstanding. I think great writers/speakers are the ones that manage that balance.

I've noticed one of the three best tips for writing emails is writing according to SMART. (the others are simply not writing at all and only formulating one question per email with proper (smart) phrasing) too bad I don't always follow those tips...

Re Mike: Regarding vision:
I think I know understand your stance on vision. I agree there are lot of meaningless visions around, especially in the corporate world and otherwise in terms of private lives with 'pie in the sky' visions. I think the interesting thing about a compelling vision is that it wears off even if it is enticing at first. Thinking about a million dollars over and over again gets boring to the mind if all you do is look at it. There's more to it.

I think what I like about visualisation and the list methods and things like 'describing your ideal day' is that those things tend to manifest without really being all too conscious of it during the journey to it - in a set it and forget it mode many a time. Just like Christine ended up with a view over a Marina without really planning it out in detail. And like you said about my million dollar example being an example of a poorly formed goal, i.e. what is the plan to getting a million? Again that's the freeing thing about a visualisation becaus you don't have to know the hows (and how could one anyway)

I think I agree with a quote that goes along the lines of 'fail to plan and you're planning to fail.' But how do you plan for something you have clear path toward like most objectives. Most people plan on trying to win the lottery or go to the best law school because that is all they can creatively come up with in order to obtain a goal like a million dollars. But the prior is as likely as winning a match again tiger woods and the latter is bound to setup you up for 50-80 hr work weeks.

I think the most rewarding effect of planning is that it reduces options (and potentially decreases stress) which compels action and action in turns leads to further clarity. So if 'Dude' who pursues a million dollars first tries the lottery and he gets disencouraged after losing a couple in a row, he may adapt his plan to the more elaborate law school option. And then when he realizes he's not really in the lifestyle he desires, he will creatively find a new plan. It would be nice to cut back on the dead-end roads, which again, envisioning helps with that because you're able to get more detail if you simply 'go their in your mind' rather than just employing methodical logic.

More importantly, when setting a SMART goal, the logical mindset is that it is centered around taking action and in contrast a vision can be achieved in some cases without expending much effort at all. It's the difference between working and traveling toward a goal.

RE Mark: elaboration of push & pull

thanks!

Another perspective on goal setting:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Finding-Happiness-Frustrating-World-Johnson/dp/159858748X/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1244048963&sr=1-11

The author is a physical therapist who has written some simple treatment books based on randomized controlled trials and scientific studies that have been published in peer-reviewed journals.

In this little book he applies the same approach to research on happiness. His main conclusion:

Goals make you happy, long-term, if they are intrinsic and concordant. Concordant in that the outcome has value and meaning to you. Intrinsic in that you enjoy the process of getting there.

Very simplistic in a way and I'd dismiss it on that basis if it wasn't for the research behind it.

A vision as impoverished as "have $1m" is as useless as a plan that says "get $1m".

If you put the work into developing a rich vision you will be both inspired to plan action and much more likely to spot quick opportunities which move you in the right direction.

But...

developing a coherent vision is hard.

"I'd dismiss it on that basis if it wasn't for the research behind it."

Without going on and on about research and mental health... suffice it to say, be weary. Remember all that rock-proof data about CBT? It's starting to crumble. It would appear psychoanalytic therapists are now bedfellows with neuroscience. Go figure.

It wasn't too long ago when I witnessed the fudging of numbers to justify our services (early-psychosis). Happens all the time.

Avrum said above:

"B. Sher has a beautiful section on how to differentiate a goal vs. THE GOAL i.e. the emotional kernel of what you want. It's the ol' Rolling Stone idea... what you want vs what you need.. "

I totally agree - the Dude that wants a million dollars would be best served by looking at what he thinks a million dollars would give him: Freedom? Choice of what he does every day? Time to sit on the beach? Time to spend with his friends? The ability to pursue projects he's interested in?

None of those require a million dollars, they require a different mindset.

Once you've identified that, it seems to me (in my own experience), that it becomes harder to NOT work on the goal than it is to work on it.

Good Morning Mark,

<<< I said that there's nothing wrong with SMART goals except that they are dull.

You told me that SMART goals could be jazzed up so they weren't dull.

I said that in that case they weren't SMART goals.

You now say that there's nothing wrong with SMART goals except that they are dull.

We are agreed! <<<

Why do you suppose we keep doing that? ;-)

In a nutshell:

- SMART (or any well-formedness acronym) makes sure you have the "musts"

- If you use only the minimum the goal can sound dull and demotivating

- One does not HAVE to stick only to the minimum

- A SMART goal can still be a SMART goal is worded to be exciting ... as it can be made dull if one likes.

- Finally, I grant that there is an argument to make that "smart goal" means ONLY the minimum ... but, as above, I don't think that argument is useful.

So I don't know if that makes us in agreement or not. As I said previously (some time ago) I think we have radically different world-views and that colors how we communicate.

Blood: It was pretty good. That lab tech drew blood better than a mosquito. Damn, I worship competence -- especially when it saves me discomfort. Now tomorrow I get to listen to the doctor tell me what I already know. Perhaps if I put some items on my AF list about what kinds of foods to eat and to actually lace up my shoes ... <grumble>

Good Morning Peter,

WOW, such a juicy post this morning. I love it. Thanks so much ;-)

>>> Re Mike: Regarding terminology in psychology

yes there is a ton of terminology in psychology, I think the main struggle with the abundance of terminology is that it becomes harder for an average person to understand it unless it is accompanied by good examples or background knowledge. And even with this we need other people like philosophers to remind us of the use of words (like the word 'self', what is really referring to?) <<<

I agree but personally put the emphasis not so much on the difficulty the average person has, but the difficulty that even professionals have if they are not clear in their terminology. And the moment one introduces a second word which makes no new distinction, one has taken away meaning, not added to it. (Except in the case of poetry ;-)

The real danger occurs when a person thinks they see a dictinction and hastily coins a term for it and it is taken up unthinkingly by the rest of the herd and so the false distinction becomes encoded and goes unquestioned.

It is not always easy to avoid the trap of poor terminology. I find myself often using the term "plan" when I really mean "goal". Those are two different things but usage has become sloppy. Likewise "project" and "goal" and "plan" are all different things.

>>> But even with examples one can always break them down no, you just put up the right angle. Like your response to the million dollar&policy maker example: valid points but within the example the intended illustration, which was also I think the intention of the article is that people tend to set smart goals that don't work, which isn't a direct attack at SMART goal as a technique. <<<

I see this as a good example of how terminology gets us into trouble. What does it mean to say that "SMART goals do not work"? A "goal" does not "work". A goal is an outcome one wishes. It neither "works" nor "does not work". It is the "plan" which "works" (or not). And further, plans always "work" if they are well-formed plans. (Meaning, in this case, that one views planning as a process including taking feedback from success and failure and modifying the "plan".) If one views plan as static (as implied by the term "plan") then one might be tempted to say the plan failed ... what really failed was the "planER" ... or maybe better, the"planING". In linguistic terminology, "plan" is a nominalization. It is a verb made into a noun. We have a nasty habit of reworking nouns and verbs in current English to make logical mush of what is really going on. (Why do doctors feel the need to say "visualize" when they mean "see"? Now there is one that gets my goat. But that's another problem ;-)

>>> But if the terminology is there to describe something more specifically&succintly and we don't have different words for it, it's a necessary and useful thing. <<<

Yeah, but we really owe it to ourselves to give it a shot, no?

>>> Confirmation bias for example is a great driver for discussion in that every person in a discussion while shine angles that illuminate different aspects unseen to the other party, since they are seeking information to comply with their beliefs and will juggle responses in such a way that it at least fits with their thinking. It does bring out a lot of useful detail, which wouldn't be possible if everybody would only exchange oneliners to the effect of 'sit down & shut up'. (Although I love the oneliners) <<<

One-liners have the virtue that they stimulate both thinking and debate. When someone says "Sit down and shutup" (in the context in which you cite it) that stimulates my thinking. "Does lack of motion help attention? Does silence? Well, they might help me. Would they help everyone? Do they always help me?" Thus my somewhat terse retort: "And what? Fall asleep? Which was my one-liner (two-liner?) pointing out that sleep is one way to be quiet and not move and it would not result in attention being paid.

>>> I do agree with Jacqueline regarding the use of succint remarks. Losing specificity can open up ambiguity and therefore weakens the intended impact of the words. I admire Mark for his succint writing style but even with his writing there's the increasing potential of misunderstanding. I think great writers/speakers are the ones that manage that balance. <<<

That is where the balance needs to be struck. "Sit down ..." may stimulate debate but it is obviously not the answer ... as my retort illustrated, there is at least one case where it clearly fails. One might better have said: "Perhaps pausing for a moment and shutting out distraction would make attention come more easily." Better ... I can't make my remark about falling asleep then. But still, I think there are other bases to cover that require more words. How many is an open question.

>>> I've noticed one of the three best tips for writing emails is writing according to SMART. (the others are simply not writing at all and only formulating one question per email with proper (smart) phrasing) too bad I don't always follow those tips... <<<

Well, to quote someone or other (debate rages as to who said it ;-) "I'm writing you this long letter because I did not have time to write a shorter one." It takes time to write well. My writing has deteriorated over the last years mostly because of the Internet. There is so much that I want to respond to but I don't have the time to do it well. Thank Zeus (I'm trying to be specific here ;-) for spell checkers.

I was brought up to have a topic for any communication. To lay out an argument. To present each part of the argument in its own paragraph. To have a topic sentence, supporting information, and a summary for each paragraph. Now arguments become muddied. Paragraphs are often more for visual effect than logical.


>>> Re Mike: Regarding vision:

I think I know understand your stance on vision. I agree there are lot of meaningless visions around, especially in the corporate world and otherwise in terms of private lives with 'pie in the sky' visions. I think the interesting thing about a compelling vision is that it wears off even if it is enticing at first. Thinking about a million dollars over and over again gets boring to the mind if all you do is look at it. There's more to it. <<<

I agree with that. I also think that it gets more boring because it can NOT be visualized by most people. If you ask a $15K clerk how much he would like to be paid if he might say $30K, thinking that was a lot of money. Let's assume his name is NOT "Dude" and so he works hard and in a year he has made $30K. Ask him again and he might say $58K or something. A year later, he might say $85K. The point is that what he thinks that "a lot of money" is, depends on where he stands when asked. So "Dude" can say all he wants about $1M but he has NO idea what that is, or what it takes to get there. He is too far away. He needs his "vision" to be something he can "see".

And that is my problem with vision statements. They are often vague, improbably, and just not useful.

My second problem is that they are often used INSTEAD OF goals and plans and actions. There is a whole bunch of new-age crapola (largely coming out of the Transcendentalist movement in philosophy) in which visualizing is held to be enough. That is simply destructive.

>>> I think what I like about visualisation and the list methods and things like 'describing your ideal day' is that those things tend to manifest without really being all too conscious of it during the journey to it - in a set it and forget it mode many a time. <<<

See, that is where the wheels come off the cart for me. If you want something you have to do something. "Set it and forget it" leaves it up to chance.

>>> Just like Christine ended up with a view over a Marina without really planning it out in detail. And like you said about my million dollar example being an example of a poorly formed goal, i.e. what is the plan to getting a million? Again that's the freeing thing about a visualisation becaus you don't have to know the hows (and how could one anyway) <<<

An example of an intuitive goal: "I'd love to live by the water."
Actions taken: None
Results achieved:

- A year later having the good fortune to find a nice home with an ocean view, or
- A year later being hit by lightening and killed, or
- A year later, thinking "I'd love to live by the water."

Now which is the more likely outcome?

Visualization can tickle the RAC and so get us to notice things, become aware of opportunities, etc. But if the opportunities do not come by CHANCE, there will be no good outcome. In order to GET what you want, for sure, you have to take some action.

>>> I think I agree with a quote that goes along the lines of 'fail to plan and you're planning to fail.'<<<

One of those silly one-liners <blush> ;-)

<<< But how do you plan for something you have clear path toward like most objectives. <

That is EXACTLY what planning is all about. Building a clear path from an unclear path which came from no path at all.

>>> Most people plan on trying to win the lottery or go to the best law school because that is all they can creatively come up with in order to obtain a goal like a million dollars. But the prior is as likely as winning a match again tiger woods and the latter is bound to setup you up for 50-80 hr work weeks. <<<

And the former is a bad plan while the latter is a plan that succeeds. It only fails if your goal was to be HAPPY and have a million dollars. It is possible (indeed all too common) to make a good plan to archive a poorly conceived goal.

>>> I think the most rewarding effect of planning is that it reduces options (and potentially decreases stress) which compels action and action in turns leads to further clarity. <<<

A really good way of putting it!

>>> So if 'Dude' who pursues a million dollars first tries the lottery and he gets disencouraged after losing a couple in a row, he may adapt his plan to the more elaborate law school option. And then when he realizes he's not really in the lifestyle he desires, he will creatively find a new plan. <<<

That is exactly how it works! Planing -> action -> feedback -> revised plan -> action -> feedback -> etc.

>>> It would be nice to cut back on the dead-end roads, which again, envisioning helps with that because you're able to get more detail if you simply 'go their in your mind' rather than just employing methodical logic. <<<

I am not arguing against envisioning. I'm arguing that it is not sufficient, that it is misunderstood, and that it can lead to the WRONG road. So what if Dude decides that he wants a million. He then visualizes. From where does he draw his mental movie? From glamor and fan magazines? From Hollywood films about rich and famous people in fast cars and jets? Without "methodical logic" that is all he has access to. He does not know, personally, any millionaires. He has to rely on what is fed to the public. And so he will go down the wrong road just as readily as if he drew his conclusions any other way. He will end up working 80 hour weeks and finally, only after getting there, realize that 80 hour weeks is ALL there is. No jets. No fast cars. No time to fly or drive. But that was not in his vision so he did not see it. In one sense, the vision hurt him as it kept him from seeing that he was on the wrong path. Much of this envisioning is akin to putting out your own eyes so you don't see that you are going down the wrong road.

>>> More importantly, when setting a SMART goal, the logical mindset is that it is centered around taking action and in contrast a vision can be achieved in some cases without expending much effort at all. It's the difference between working and traveling toward a goal. <<<

But as I hope I have illustrated, working is neither a bad thing nor something there is any way around.

Thanks for this thoughtful post. I enjoyed it.

Mark,

LOL ;-) And may I extend the same empathy ;-)

I guess in this case our world views are similar. Or maybe, to be serious for a moment, not so much ... I don't know.

This is one of those goals-motivation things. I really do have good health goals ... I just don't have the motivation. It really irks me, too. I know better and yet I just "drift" with respect to health goals. "Health" is one of me uber-goals -- or goal "areas". I know all about diet, exercise, etc. Things just go down hill so fast if you don't get the shoes laced up and really decide that you don't LIKE strawberry ice cream.

To cite that great philosophical work "The Matrix": "There's a difference between knowing the path and walking the path." LOL ;-) Don't you just love it when pop-philosophy makes sense?

Speaking of which, where did I put those sneakers?

Mark,

Yes, very true. I have structured things as best I can think, to make it easier. I have shoes and socks laid out the night before, etc. But I'll give it some more intense thought now. I'm sure there is more I can do, though I'm not sure how to make exercising easier than not exercising.

Mike

Give $1000 to a Buddy and claim back $100 every time you take exercise.

Join a Gym class led by a gorgeous blonde you can't resist.

Promise this forum that you will walk naked around the Mall if you do not take exercise at least 10 times in the next month. (I undertake to send you a special post at the end of the month to make you accountable).

Clearly the possibilities are endless...

Third grade joke--

Timmy: I wish I had enough money to buy an elephant.
Teacher: Why, Timmy, what would you do with an elephant?
Timmy: I don't want an elephant. I just want enough money to buy an elephant.

A propos?

Mike, I have struggled with this one, and I never liked that advice about "find exercise you enjoy" or even worse, "if you don't do exercise that you enjoy then it won't last" or "find a buddy to exercise with" (expecting the "accountability" factor to solve the problem.) (Not sure if getting a dog would work!!) At any rate, finally I HAVE found some exercise that I DO really like (kind of a miracle for me) which I LOOK FORWARD to and MAKES ME FEEL GOOD and THAT is why I actually do it... because I WANT to, not because it is something I am "supposed" to do, that is a discipline. So ... FWIW, maybe just keep trying to find some form of movement that actually feels good to you?

(For me, it has been qigong, specifically I am using the DVDs by the Garripoli's .. there is enough variety on the 3 DVDs to keep my practice fresh .. I mainly use the "Qigong for detox" because it is both relaxing/ energizing but I also really like their Qigong for Stress Relief and Qigong for Beginners. At any rate, qigong might not be for you, but maybe there is SOME form of movement you would actually enjoy? horseback riding? :o) )

Bev

I fully agree that if your exercise is enjoyable it makes it a lot easier.

However, I find that even for "enjoyable" exercise, it sometimes takes a bit to overcome inertia. Hence, I like to add the elements of:
1. Understanding the benefits more thoroughly
2. Receiving encouragement from others.
3. Making myself accountable to another for participation.

Once the inertia is overcome, don't we always enjoy our favourite exercise. Don't we say: "I am so glad I made the effort".

You mark my words. Mike clearly has an extraordinary capacity to devise plans that work. I cannot imagine that he will not amaze us with the plan he will come up with, if indeed he is happy to share it with us.

Mike,

I see three limitations of SMART goals:
1. They achieve nothing without a plan
2. They are open to unintended consequences
3. They focus attention

Dude's "$1m in the bank by the time I'm 30" is a perfectly SMART goal. It must be achievable and realistic: lots of other people do it. But:
1. without some very rigorous planning it is worthless.
2. And with that planning it could be worse than useless, taking him somewhere he didn't really want to go.
3. While he's focusing "like a laser beam" (love that phrase - so right emotionally and so wrong technically) on getting his banking degree, he's missing
a. opportunities for voluntary service which would have taken him overseas and introduced him to interesting people - which were really what he wanted all along
b. early warnings that the banking system is rotten

A rigorously developed vision has different limitations.
1. It doesn't guarantee where you will end up - only that it will be better in some way than where you are now
2. It doesn't guarantee timing. If you're English and you need a Russian visa next week, you'd better have a pretty detailed plan and track it by the hour!
3. it dilutes attention across multiple opportunities and threats

So if Dude was clear that he wanted to see lots of interesting places, meet lots of interesting people, be interesting himself and have plenty of the colour olive green, he could develop these (more specific about what is interesting about places and people, for instance).

And then one day he's off to a fencing competition in the park when he notices that he's passing a recruiting office for the marines. Nice colour scheme...

Or a he's reading the Economist and sees an article on the resurgence of voluntary service overseas...

Or a blog that he follows mentions an internship in a leading edge marketing consultancy with some of the most interesting people in business...

Visioning becomes more important when the environment is chaotic in the mathematical sense that a small change can have a large and unpredictable effect.

I wonder Mark, with Autofocus, whether you are closer to that vision of the Future Self you created in the opening pages of the "Dreams" book. I suspect you are, what with the storm of excitement AF has created. :)

Goals are such a huge topic wherever they are discussed, and the "Dreams" book was one of the few I felt I could relate to, as it discussed extensively the internal battles that rage when a goal is set. Staying the course is half the battle won, imho.

I am revisiting the dog eared pages again, thanks to this extensive discussion, and hope to renew and re-energise. Some long term goals have, over time, become stale and atrophied but still resonate internally because at the time I committed to them after reading the book, they were fresh and full of feeling that I generated by seeing the end result. Over time, they became relegated to the back-end of thought, and every now and then, the tasks associated with them bring back memories of a child-like excitement I had.

More than ever, I am convinced that goals have to resonate with the senses, or they lose meaning and purpose via the path of least resistance.

This thread has been a fascinating read. Thanks to everyone here.

An apt reminder Mark. That is the main reason why some of my goals went stale. Re-reading the book, especially the part on the goal achievement method, the message comes out clear - keep it current and keep it relevant.

Jim,

I like your style ;-) Unfortunately (for the idea, not for me) I'm already married to a georgeous blond ;-)

Bev,

I like your approach because it gets to the core of things. What I want, really, is to feel better. I had lost my focus on that point. I'm not interested in eating better or exercising more because I "should", but because those things will make me feel better (i.e. be more healthy and so have less discomfort). That is the long term goal. It only makes sense to devise short term actions which focus on the same thing.

I used to run. I was a running fool. I think that, in part, is what is causing me so much knee pain later in life. When I was in my 30's, I went back to get a degree in computer science at UCLA. Every day, at about 11:00, I'd run the perimeter of the campus ... and it is a huge campus. In fact, I even laid the groundwork for my meditation practice at that point. I found that the only way I could do it was to "trance out" while running, and focus on my internal sensations. That was then and this is now (many pounds later). But the point is I really loved doing that. I looked forward to it every day. I did not do it because I had to.

Now running is out. Jogging is out. Walking is in, but I'm not sure I love it so much. I'm going to have to do some "field research" ;-) to find something I like.

Thanks for getting me thinking in this direction. One of those DUH! moments ;-)

Jim (again ... I'm not reading ahead before I post these ;-)

I agree that it is wise to set up some of the things you suggest. I also agree that it has to be done with care. IOW, it is good to have accountability, but not so good to make things contingent on what someone else things or does. It's a balance.

In any case, I'll report back with my results (that will be my accountabiliy ;-)

Mike

I'm delighted to hear that you are happy to report back.

I was also a bit of a runner when I was younger and like many in my age bracket, knee problems makes that a problem.

These days, I rarely miss a day without exercise (Seniors aerobics, walking, water play in the rehab. lane at the pool, rowing machine and cycling on equipment at the gym, and yoga once or twice a week...ah, yoga...if only I had kept that up more over the years, my body would be ten years younger today).

Take it very, very gently. When we ease back into exercise after some time away, it is so easy to sustain injuries and they can be damaging to our sense of well-being.

I look forward to further reports.

Hey Mark,

>>> I see three limitations of SMART goals:
1. They achieve nothing without a plan <<<

I'm not sure why you see that to be a limitation. Looking at it from the reverse:

- Anything you want requires some action
- The actions taken need to be those that get you where you want to go
- Those actions are selected by means of a PLAN
- The PLAN is devised keeping the GOAL in mind.

>>> 2. They are open to unintended consequences

Pretty much every action is, no?

>>> 3. They focus attention

Admit it now, you put that in there just to tantalize me ;-)

>>> Dude's "$1m in the bank by the time I'm 30" is a perfectly SMART goal. It must be achievable and realistic: lots of other people do it.

I can't disagree in principle, but in practice I wonder if it is indeed realistic. Look, the guy is high on Mary Jane and has no clue what $1 million is, let alone what he could do to get it or how long it would take. True, lots of people do it but then lots of people have it together. I would consider it a better goal if the amount and time frame were shorter. Or the goal were "staged" (i.e. "$10K in the bank this year leading me to my eventual goal of $1M in the bank by age 30.") It is really not appropriate to judge what is realistic for others, but I think that a smaller chunk might be better in Dude's case.

>>> But:

1. without some very rigorous planning it is worthless.<<<

Yes. Of course.

2. And with that planning it could be worse than useless, taking him somewhere he didn't really want to go.

That is what I was saying earlier. It would take him where he has DECIDED he wants to go, it won't necessarily take him to a place he will be happy with when he gets there. That is why I view planning as a process, rather than a static document. After Dude's first year trying to save $10K (from his better goal) from his job flipping burgers at the Big Mac Supper Club, he will almost certainly become disillusioned in some way. Depending on what way, he will adjust his plan:

- I'll never get there flipping burgers ... I'd better go to business school, or
- Man, this working is the pits. I'm going to Hawaii and surf for a living.

>>> 3. While he's focusing "like a laser beam" (love that phrase - so right emotionally and so wrong technically)

Just interested, why is it wrong technically? Laser light is "coherent" and scatters much less, no?

>>> on getting his banking degree, he's missing

a. opportunities for voluntary service which would have taken him overseas and introduced him to interesting people - which were really what he wanted all along <<<

Yes, that is probably true. Every choice eliminates other opportunities. No getting away from it. But how can he know that at the end of a long series of events he will arrive at someplace he would eventually like better than what he envisions now? It is just as reasonable to make the argument that if he "drifted" and made those connections and met interesting people, he would have longed for the $1M he wished he had persued. The future is always up for grabs, no?

Maybe that is why I love planning so much ... you keep questioning where you are and where you are going.

>>> b. early warnings that the banking system is rotten

That's a tough problem. I can tell you personally that I headed off in the wrong direction and did not realize how much I would really HATE management until I got there. It goes so much against my character. I'm not sure what I might have done to become aware of it early enough to have avoided the trap. I mean, it was the defined "path of success" in my industry. Programmers don't make it very far unless they are so far above the pack that they work in the research labs running their own projects ... and even then, they find themselves sucked into management of some kind or other. It was not until I actually had to DO the management tasks, day in and day out, that I realized how awful it was. From the outside looking in, I just don't see how I could have known. But more to the point, I DID not know. And I'm not sure how taking my eye off the ball would have shown me. I knew managers since forever, and liked a lot of them. It is not so much the people who I don't like, it is the system. It is profoundly antithetical to my world-view.

>>> A rigorously developed vision has different limitations.

1. It doesn't guarantee where you will end up - only that it will be better in some way than where you are now <<<

Yes, I can see that.

>>> 2. It doesn't guarantee timing. If you're English and you need a Russian visa next week, you'd better have a pretty detailed plan and track it by the hour! <<<

Yes, I see that as well.

>>> 3. it dilutes attention across multiple opportunities and threats <<<

I can see it doing that to me. I'm not sure that there are not people who would not have some mechanism which would allow them to pick something and cut off others. I mean, wouldn't the vision allow certain people to select the best course because it better fit the vision than other courses?

>>> So if Dude was clear that he wanted to see lots of interesting places, meet lots of interesting people, be interesting himself and have plenty of the colour olive green, he could develop these (more specific about what is interesting about places and people, for instance).

And then one day he's off to a fencing competition in the park when he notices that he's passing a recruiting office for the marines. Nice colour scheme... <<<

ROTFLMAO ;-)

>>> Or a he's reading the Economist <<<

Dude reads the Economist? Now THAT IS a stretch ;-)

>>> and sees an article on the resurgence of voluntary service overseas...

Or a blog that he follows mentions an internship in a leading edge marketing consultancy with some of the most interesting people in business... <<<

But does that not just push the problem back a step? Now he has to decide if he is going to be a marketing consultant and if so, how? So he's back into planning that path ... or drifting some more until he reads the next blog and sees the next shiny object, no?

>>> Visioning becomes more important when the environment is chaotic in the mathematical sense that a small change can have a large and unpredictable effect. <<<

IOW, following a vision rather than a plan makes more sense when there is less known? I see why you say that, I think, but I can also see that planning handles unknowns as well ... assuming you see planning as an ongoing process with plenty of feedback.

In another post you say:

>>> One thing I don't think I emphasized enough when writing the "Dreams" book is that the vision of the Future Self has to change and evolve as you work on it. That is why the vision itself is regularly revised as well as the current situation.

It's only by working on the vision in this way that you can identify what you really want. My vision now would be very different from what it was at the start of the book. <<<

I guess I'm not sure what the difference between "visioning" and "planning" are. It seems as if they are the same except that you don't say what you are going to actually do. You set a "goal = vision", and then stop before you actually think about what you could do to accomplish it?

Mark,

On Exercise Goal:

>>> Very often involving other people in some way helps to provide the structure. <<<

I'm starting to come around to that way of thinking. In fact, what is it that has gotten me thinking about this just now? A health assessment at the doctor's office. It is kind of like cleaning before the maid comes. Having this come up has caused me to assess my own condition and become dissatisfied with it. I don't need him to actually TELL me what to do. I just need to think about what I'm sure he WILL tell me to do ... and then think about why I've not been doing it so far.

>>> In addition to Jim's examples, off the top of my head:

- get sponsored for charity on your results
- put a huge bet with your friends that you will achieve your goal
- write a daily blog/Facebook/Twitter entry on your activities <<<

Now that last is interesting. Or, being the 5 that I am, simply journaling my adventures might be enough. Maybe not.

>>> - find a buddy to exercise with <<<

In the past, the problem I've had is that those I've worked with have dropped out. Not so helpful to me when that happens.

>>> - get a support group <<<

LOL ;-) "Hi, my name is Mike, and I don't exercise." ROTF ;-)

But I do get your point.

Jim,

>>> I'm delighted to hear that you are happy to report back. <<<

I think it is a good thing for me to do. I'm sure if my silence (on this) becomes deafening, someone will call me on it ;-)

>>> I was also a bit of a runner when I was younger and like many in my age bracket, knee problems makes that a problem. <<<

Oh, the ironies abound, no? "They" told me I needed exercise and running was great exercise. Then my knees gave out, so they told me I should not have run so much. Now they tell me I need more exercise. LOL ;-)

>>> These days, I rarely miss a day without exercise (Seniors aerobics, walking, water play in the rehab. lane at the pool, rowing machine and cycling on equipment at the gym, and yoga once or twice a week...ah, yoga...if only I had kept that up more over the years, my body would be ten years younger today).<<<

I hear 'ya. The one thing I've been very good about is taking vitamins. I started that in my teens and followed the "guru"s on it. Read every word Linus Pauling wrote on vitamin C, etc. It just made so much sense to me. And maybe popping a few pills is not all that hard.

>>> Take it very, very gently. When we ease back into exercise after some time away, it is so easy to sustain injuries and they can be damaging to our sense of well-being. <<<

Yes, it is easy to get overly enthusiastic. At my age, it takes much less to overdo and the recover is much longer.

>>> I look forward to further reports. <<<

Thanks for the kind words and support, Jim.

Will, Mark,

Ooooops, sorry. I'm in a rush today and flying through these interesting posts so I am guilty of a misatribution. <head hanging low, toe digging into carpet>

Really, I should have realized that Mark would have used fewer words ;-)

"I used to run. I was a running fool. I think that, in part, is what is causing me so much knee pain later in life"

Mike: You may know what follows, as you sound like a very serious runner. However, just in case you don't: over time, we forget that we need to ensure that we land on the balls of our feet when running, because running shoes are built with plenty of cushion and padding, and with the constant pounding, we tend to land on our heels.

If you run with your shoes off, you will notice that we have the immediate instinct to take off and land on the balls of your feet. That provides the skeletal framework with plenty of support and spring it needs to prevent lower back and knee problems.

I recall seeing this in a video, but have since lost that link to post here. I'm a bit of a jogger/runner myself, and over time developed a lower back issue. My experience with this has been that I have been able to run quite effectively, and held back the huge knee and lower back issues that crop up after each and every run. I was so thrilled with the results, that I ran almost every day, and my back caved in again :)

I'm waiting for it to heal before I start again, but this time with a little more common sense!

Mike,

How flattering: I think you're confusing me with Mark!

No time to respond, unfortunately.

Regards,

Will

Mike

Just to clear up any confusion, you appear to have attributed a lot of Will's remarks above to Mark.

Only the last three paragraphs refer to what Mark actually said.

This may help readers to appreciate your remarks more clearly.

Wow - running discussion on AF threads!

Couldnt agree more JD, I am just trying out "chi running" which advocates midfoot strike, heres a link for more info...

www.chirunning.com

Best regards,

Derek.

Mike, if the core / touchstone of what you liked about running was to get into a trance state of sorts, I would go for lifting weights. Or ecstatic dance? Or yoga?
(I just like lifting weights b/c of the bigger bang for the buck). And it's easy to work around injuries.
Your wife couldn't be your workout partner? Think of it as doing it for her! :-)

Jacqueline, I completely agree. Lifting weights is incredibly effective on many different levels.

Christine: Speaking of goals, how many pages do you have now? I was up to 38 which completely freaked me out. LOL I am down to 29 in just a couple of days and I have fewer than 200 tasks. Woo-hoo! I'm very pleased with that as I've managed to make all that progress with no dismissing. Dismissing is great, but I really wanted to make progress on the tasks I had waving in the breeze. I'm aiming to decrease the number of pages even further today. I'm using yet another tweak that is motivating me for the time being. Once I get the number of pages down, I would very much like to use vanilla AF!

Jacqueline,

>>> Mike, if the core / touchstone of what you liked about running was to get into a trance state of sorts, I would go for lifting weights. <<<

Yes, I have done that before and it does have that element of hyper focus coupled with detachment to it.

>>> Or ecstatic dance?

ROTF ;-) I can only envision that one ;-)

>>> Or yoga?

Yes, I have done yoga on and off. It is probably a good bet for what I should be doing now. On my list it goes ;-) ;-)

>>> (I just like lifting weights b/c of the bigger bang for the buck)

I've had good luck with weights. It is more complicated than a lot of other things but it does give bang for the buck.

>>>. And it's easy to work around injuries. Your wife couldn't be your workout partner?

We've tried that before. She is not big into sticking with things like that. Her schedule is to complicated as well. Right now she is doing her own workouts at the school gym, before or after work. It seems to be working out well for her.

My "problem" is I am very schedule driven when it comes to something like this. If I am to stick with working out, it MUST be every morning at 5:00 am EVERY morning or I get frustrated and give up. "Crap, what's the point?" kind of thing. With my wife, she can do it sporadically, and not be demotivated. She is more resilient that way. With me it is both a physical and mental thing. If I don't keep working physically my body gets all out of joint, if you know what I mean. (My wife tells me to quit being such an "all or nothing" person. LOL ;-) As if I really could!)

>>> Think of it as doing it for her! :-) <<<

Ah, that's a double edged sword ;-) In one sense I really am ... but that does not work as motivation. If I can't do it for myself I just won't be able to sustain the motivation. Just like the people who quit smoking for thier spouse ... they start right up again.

Re Mike & others: 1 million dollar goal continued

Part of what you have touched on is that a goal that is too far for a person to 'see' as you've put it hampers both the ability to plan and the ability to visualize. I think that is the common experience when people reach for something that is a number of steps outside the range of their current experience. Goals too small don't inspire, and goals to big can overwhelm or be hard to visualize & plan for.

I think a case can be made that with the process of planning, at least you can just plan the next step that seems to be toward the goal. A plan of course doesn't have to entail having a complete action list ready for the whole journey from the moment you begin (a false belief many procrastinators have!).

Another person said that 'Dude's' 1 million dollar goal was empoverished. I don't automatically agree with that. Like Mike mentions, when left to visualising, a lot of people, depending on where they are in life, will draw inspiration from things like glamor and fan magazines, picturing fast cars etc.

I think one shouldn't forget that on the way to working toward an 'empoverished' goal is that you'll glean life experience that is worthwhile and productive regardless of the 'superficiality of your desire.

To tred a little in the 'new age' crapola, when a movie like the Secret comes along, a lot of people will visualize things like cars, bigger houses, checks and so forth. Which has lead many to view this movie as proliferating among other things a sense of superficial thinking.

What a lot of self made millionaires admit is that they often, like many others, did chase after things like cars and a flashy lifestyle, only to discover that the goal felt empty on achievement. You might be able to credit this to superficiality, in which case most people to some degree operate very superficial (even the supposedly smart ones).

Much like you say Mike, a goal/plan works if it is well formed. The same goes for visualising. That's why I like an exercise like 'describe the ideal day'. Which is very powerful because it gets your mind to think about what a good day would might look like, down to the seemingly trivial details like who cooks your dinner, from the topic of conversation to what your friends are like. These are details seldom involved in the development of Smart goals in corporate and private life.

At times I ask my clients what a perfect work day looks like. What are the customers saying about your service, what is the team chemistry like, what kind of results do your customers get, what hours do I leave the office and do I think about work outside of work hours, and so forth. I think it's a very powerful method that is almost like 'set and forget'.

But this is a more immersive form of visualisation which you might call 'well-formed' visualisation. And so the same might be said: well-formed visualisation always works, if it holds true for well-formed plans. (I'm not stating either perse)

What I find so crucial to this is that visualisation is such a pervasive brain process, you are doing it whether conscious of it or not. To think about the achievement or process of attaining a goal means 'seeing it complete', you have to draw something up in order to be able to even think about it.

RE: the realisticness of 'set and forget' goal setting

What I think Mike basically says about 'setting and forgetting' is that it's like leaving things up to chance. I think the important distinction is that in planning you believe much in your conscious planning ability and in the 'set and forget' style, the 'magic' happens through subconscious planning, a process which I think is much more powerful!

I think to set and forget a 'destination' actually works quite well as long as the destination is described as pretty precise & unique. Although I would further specify the 'forget' part of the equation more specifically to 'to not have to actively think about it in order for it to happen'. We do this all the time. When I didn't have many appointments in my calendar, I used to be able to memorize a date&time without effort and I would automatically remember without fail. Even when setting an alarm in the morning my body gets up just before it goes off. These are just very basic unimpressive examples, but the ability for the mind to act out responses without having to consciously keep thinking about it is very underrated. Most people don't need alarms if they would exercise their trust in their own minds abilities.

Take for instance the experience of anxiety. Anxious people are excellent subconscious planners! Their bodies know exactly when to feel fear, all the mind/body need is when the circumstances are happening and the body will plan anxiety for you. The fear of public speaking for example occurs anywhere from a few days to a few minutes before presenting. If the body/mind knows when it's presenting, it's going to plan the fear responses - even if your active 'conscious mind' is thinking about other things.

For more involved goals however, I think what explains the phenomenon I have had many times in where I've felt like I've done a simple set and forget goal setting session and achieved the outcome with very little effort on my part, is that preceding experience has pre-paved a developed sense of clarity. My mind knows what to go for, even if I'm not paying conscious attention to it.

It's a bit like having listened to many radiostations and knowing what music I like and don't like. Once I sit down and write down the precise radiostation I want to listen to, I have a much easier time tuning in to the precise frequency. A goal setting session is then the equivalent of determining the radiostation.

The most success I've had have been with housing situations and relationships. Two types of 'outcomes' that are hard to make plans for.

To pick the latter, how does one 'plan' for a romantic partner? I think this example typifies why I think the 'having to work for everything' philosophy isn't a sound one, even if it sounds like a strong value. For one of the most important goals/experience that most people share: to have a partner/wife/husband, people don't carry out a step by step plan. One is much less inclined to think that if I just put in hard work I can get a partner. For most people, attracting a partner just happens, completely unplanned for. If something as pivotal as attracting a life partner doesn't typically really involve planned & deliberate effort, how come all other goals should have to? Is it really like leaving things up to chance? I don't think it's that clear cut.

I think a very refreshing exercise is to make a list of things that need to be done, but you don't want to carry them out yourself. Just write down 'to be carried out by other forces'. Write down the things and see what happens. Strike thought 'done items' when they are resolved. A good portion will be resolved without having to interfere with it yourself ( and sometimes much better than you could have). Of course, brushing your teeth isn't one of 'm:)

I've always struggled with the "ideal day" concept. My first thought is reading by the beach in Cancun. Massage in the morning, dinner with husband and friends in the evening. Ideal! But I wouldn't want to do it every day. Neither can I describe an ideal work day scenario that I'd want to repeat multiple times. For me, the ideal is often spontaneity and the unexpected. A friend I haven't seen for ages drops by and we hang out by the pool. My child finally gets a concept he's never been able to grasp. Something uproariously funny happens that I want to remember forever. Every day can't be like that, nor would I want that. I think I have stuck with AF so long not because it's a schedule I live by day in and day out, but because it's varied and fresh and often unexpected. I'm often surprised by what's on the next page. Some of my ideal days have me whipping through that list and working on 60 tasks, but others have me resting and doing whatever occurs to me. I think I need to spend less time doing things to reach an ideal and more time seeing the ideal in what I'm doing.

Great comments Mel. I too thought about that when doing that exercise. What I did was describe a number of days that would be typical of a month. That way I could include the less frequent aspects like wanting to travel a few days per month or maybe a week (I'd go nuts having to travel all the time). Doing certain activities on certain days of the week (not necessarily fixed), like playing basketball. Even expressing how in the winter I'd be visiting our winter abode.

I think the main thing is that you invoke enough detail. Like how your lifestyle would be ideally like, there are elements to it that would have to true for it to be as varied as you describe. Like not having to be tied up to a schedule. Not feeling anxious about certain topics, like weight or work commitments. Those are all qualities that would be arising from your 'ideal day' daily chatter that you could describe. You can definitely lift out many aspects that are true for your flexible lifestyle.

But you don't have to describe with the intention of describing the ideal sequence of activities, as if you have stick to certain meals when you wanted a varied choice. Let's say a person today looks at the people around him/her and takes note of what the usual conversations they have in their head and with friends/colleagues, how one feels about oneself. Let's say one has crappy friends who like to whine on and on about the economy, or people who gossip or talk politics (pick your poison). Or maybe you're constantly fighting with your neighbours or family. From that platform you can describe the opposite, the types of conversations you'd prefer to be happing on a daily basis.

"I feel fit and refreshed when doing my morning exercise. I love that I my meals are prepared for me and are both delicious and good for my health. My partner and I talk about how we are anticipating our next traveling adventure during breakfast. At lunch when I eat with friends we have silly fun and reminisce old times. My colleagues speak highly of me. Eight of ten customers that talk with us share how much they liked our service..." and so on and so forth.

The short term effect of this is that you're much more likely to retrain your environment to what you are wanting to focus on. Which amounts to finding the ideal in the present moment. That might mean skipping the daily gossip, avoiding news broadcasts or taking up a leisure activity. Those minor actions can make a huge difference. While crude, it sometimes makes a huge difference to move away from people that are draining and an exercise like the above is a great way to make it more obvious how people are influencing your day to day experience in ways that you actually have a choice over.

In other words it helps taking charging of what you are going to put your attention on, because you are paying attention to details you'd ordinarily take for granted or not give notice to.