FV and FVP Forum > WANT or EASIER?
I would just like to add that an urgent task would always trump your list.
Matt
Matt
April 26, 2012 at 5:55 |
Matt
Matt
Interesting Matt. I would also argue that those exciting tasks (even though they may be hard) will also trump the easier one's, but not the urgent one's.
April 26, 2012 at 6:24 |
Nico
Nico
The questions keywords Mark had highlighted were WANT and BEFORE. Mark also said *all* the reasons for wanting todo the tasks are valid.
So when pre-selecting and having only a short slot of discretionary time you might WANT todo only "short tasks" that can fit the time slot. Or that your day is full and you have only this slot of discretionary time for FV, you might WANT todo only "urgent & short tasks". Or when you had a long day, multiple FV chains completed and you want to wind down, you might WANT to do only "easy tasks".
I wrote "easy" not "easier". I understand the comparison criteria in the question should be the keyword "BEFORE", not anything else.
When your WANT criteria drastically changes, you might need to abort your current pre-selected list and reselect according to your WANT & BEFORE criteria.
So when pre-selecting and having only a short slot of discretionary time you might WANT todo only "short tasks" that can fit the time slot. Or that your day is full and you have only this slot of discretionary time for FV, you might WANT todo only "urgent & short tasks". Or when you had a long day, multiple FV chains completed and you want to wind down, you might WANT to do only "easy tasks".
I wrote "easy" not "easier". I understand the comparison criteria in the question should be the keyword "BEFORE", not anything else.
When your WANT criteria drastically changes, you might need to abort your current pre-selected list and reselect according to your WANT & BEFORE criteria.
April 26, 2012 at 7:50 |
sabre23t
sabre23t
Matt:
I tried your suggested method out during the testing. The trouble with it is that focusing exclusively on one criterion (easiness) results in other valid criteria (urgency, need, timing, desire, panic, etc) being ignored. My "Want" question is designed to allow you to take all of these into account.
You recognise this to some degree by saying "Urgency" trumps "Easiness"
I tried your suggested method out during the testing. The trouble with it is that focusing exclusively on one criterion (easiness) results in other valid criteria (urgency, need, timing, desire, panic, etc) being ignored. My "Want" question is designed to allow you to take all of these into account.
You recognise this to some degree by saying "Urgency" trumps "Easiness"
April 26, 2012 at 10:30 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark et al,
I completely understand the WANT definition. I was only offering a *temporary* solution to those who still seem to be having trouble grasping the concept. It still appears to be a topic of conversation.
Guilt is a big part of resistance – just in case that escaped the attention of some. My thought was to get a person moving and in the process discern to value of WANT. The reason for my follow-up comment was that I didn't want to be responsible for someone ignoring an urgent task while they were experimenting.
Again, my suggestion was only of a temporary nature.
Matt
I completely understand the WANT definition. I was only offering a *temporary* solution to those who still seem to be having trouble grasping the concept. It still appears to be a topic of conversation.
Guilt is a big part of resistance – just in case that escaped the attention of some. My thought was to get a person moving and in the process discern to value of WANT. The reason for my follow-up comment was that I didn't want to be responsible for someone ignoring an urgent task while they were experimenting.
Again, my suggestion was only of a temporary nature.
Matt
April 26, 2012 at 13:53 |
Matt
Matt
"Easiest" would be a disaster! Polishing the silverware in deep storage is easier than doing taxes.
Ease of doing something is already part of "want" -- on the wrong side. We don't want to DO things that are too difficult. On the other hand, we want to get them DONE. (Well, except for fun challenges.)
The "want" in the question includes "make my life easier". Starting taxes early enough to identify and deal with paper chains before the deadline make my life easier. (E.g., I need to collect and submit the medical expenses to insurance, so they can pay whatever part they pay, so I can claim the difference on my taxes. Submitting those expenses isn't easy -- the website programmer was paid by the share-holders to make me want to give up.)
It would be nice to always work on the easiest task on the list, but it won't work. On the other hand, redefining the task or breaking it down differently might make it easier -- which is a good thing.
Ease of doing something is already part of "want" -- on the wrong side. We don't want to DO things that are too difficult. On the other hand, we want to get them DONE. (Well, except for fun challenges.)
The "want" in the question includes "make my life easier". Starting taxes early enough to identify and deal with paper chains before the deadline make my life easier. (E.g., I need to collect and submit the medical expenses to insurance, so they can pay whatever part they pay, so I can claim the difference on my taxes. Submitting those expenses isn't easy -- the website programmer was paid by the share-holders to make me want to give up.)
It would be nice to always work on the easiest task on the list, but it won't work. On the other hand, redefining the task or breaking it down differently might make it easier -- which is a good thing.
April 26, 2012 at 14:00 |
Cricket
Cricket
Cricket,
You completely misunderstood my post. I think you should reread it.
I never suggested taking only the easiest tasks. The first task in the list might be the toughest task on the list. I think your comments completely miss the mark.
Matt
You completely misunderstood my post. I think you should reread it.
I never suggested taking only the easiest tasks. The first task in the list might be the toughest task on the list. I think your comments completely miss the mark.
Matt
April 26, 2012 at 14:55 |
Matt
Matt
I fnd that I usually rephrase the question to "but first, I'll do" as in -
I'll do the first item on the list, "but first I'll do" item 5 "but first I'll do" item 12 "but first I'll do" item 20.
Which makes a ladder of item 20, item 12, item 5 and item 1
I'll do the first item on the list, "but first I'll do" item 5 "but first I'll do" item 12 "but first I'll do" item 20.
Which makes a ladder of item 20, item 12, item 5 and item 1
April 26, 2012 at 15:27 |
Lillian
Lillian
I don't have difficulty with the want/question bit. But the difficulty from understanding the question is probably due to indecision. all you have to do is complete the sentence..."before I do x, I want to do----" if its difficult to complete the sentence then most likely you're indecisive from the number of options available on the list.
Maybe some sort of restriction should be put into place to help with the decision. Like:
- time available
- based on what I can do
- restrict to just physical actions
- by the top of the hour... (my fav)
- based on what I can just mentally do
- based on what's urgent
- based on what's really important
- based only on the first twenty items
Etc.
Make up other restrictions in order to limit your options, subset your list and reduce indecision.
Maybe some sort of restriction should be put into place to help with the decision. Like:
- time available
- based on what I can do
- restrict to just physical actions
- by the top of the hour... (my fav)
- based on what I can just mentally do
- based on what's urgent
- based on what's really important
- based only on the first twenty items
Etc.
Make up other restrictions in order to limit your options, subset your list and reduce indecision.
April 26, 2012 at 15:57 |
GMBW
GMBW
GMBW -
>>Make up other restrictions in order to limit your options, subset your list and reduce indecision<<
That's a good point. I did the same thing a few days ago with my home list - it was over 120 items which I found too much to handle easily. I weeded out the list in steps to make it manageable. First run though, anything that could wait until June went into a June tickler file. Second run through, all the errands. Third was "call/email/write/get in touch with--" items. That left me a manageable FV list of about 50 items, excluding errands and call-list. A 50-item list is much easier to get through
>>Make up other restrictions in order to limit your options, subset your list and reduce indecision<<
That's a good point. I did the same thing a few days ago with my home list - it was over 120 items which I found too much to handle easily. I weeded out the list in steps to make it manageable. First run though, anything that could wait until June went into a June tickler file. Second run through, all the errands. Third was "call/email/write/get in touch with--" items. That left me a manageable FV list of about 50 items, excluding errands and call-list. A 50-item list is much easier to get through
April 26, 2012 at 16:09 |
Lillian
Lillian
I am currently reading Leo Babauta's "The Power of Less" … does really help to refocus on the essential ;)
April 26, 2012 at 17:47 |
Stefano F. Rausch
Stefano F. Rausch
Quite often, I find myself slipping into asking the question, "What else do I want to do on this chain?" It still works surprisingly well. But if I find the process to be slowing down or getting confusing, I revert back to the canonical question.
Another thing I do sometimes is ask "What to do before X?", omitting the "want" verbal phrase altogether. As long as I remember it's shorthand for "What do I want to do", it seems to work pretty well, and is just a little bit faster.
Another thing I do sometimes is ask "What to do before X?", omitting the "want" verbal phrase altogether. As long as I remember it's shorthand for "What do I want to do", it seems to work pretty well, and is just a little bit faster.
April 26, 2012 at 19:49 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Seraphim wrote:
<<Quite often, I find myself slipping into asking the question, "What else do I want to do on this chain?">>
Same here. It results in some very long chains.
<< It still works surprisingly well.>>
Ditto. Still pleasant and effective and sensitive to all the right priorities and urgencies. I just start to get a stale feeling when the chain has been extended too many times, a little worried that something hiding in the middle of the list might need attention, but I am working on focusing better on The Question.
<<Quite often, I find myself slipping into asking the question, "What else do I want to do on this chain?">>
Same here. It results in some very long chains.
<< It still works surprisingly well.>>
Ditto. Still pleasant and effective and sensitive to all the right priorities and urgencies. I just start to get a stale feeling when the chain has been extended too many times, a little worried that something hiding in the middle of the list might need attention, but I am working on focusing better on The Question.
April 28, 2012 at 21:56 |
Bernie
Bernie
GMBW:
<< the difficulty from understanding the question is probably due to indecision. all you have to do is complete the sentence..."before I do x, I want to do----" if its difficult to complete the sentence then most likely you're indecisive from the number of options available on the list. >>
But if that is the case, then the person has misunderstood the algorithm. One is not faced with a huge number of options. All you have to do is to move down the list until you find the *first* thing on the list that you want to do before x. That first thing now becomes x, and so on. By benchmarking each stage of the chain in this way, you are faced only with a simple choice between two tasks at a time.
<< the difficulty from understanding the question is probably due to indecision. all you have to do is complete the sentence..."before I do x, I want to do----" if its difficult to complete the sentence then most likely you're indecisive from the number of options available on the list. >>
But if that is the case, then the person has misunderstood the algorithm. One is not faced with a huge number of options. All you have to do is to move down the list until you find the *first* thing on the list that you want to do before x. That first thing now becomes x, and so on. By benchmarking each stage of the chain in this way, you are faced only with a simple choice between two tasks at a time.
April 29, 2012 at 0:08 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Seraphim:
<< Another thing I do sometimes is ask "What to do before X?", omitting the "want" verbal phrase altogether. >>
This is not a bad way of phrasing it because it reminds one that the emphasis of the question should be "What do I want to do BEFORE x?" rather than "What do I WANT to do before x?"
<< Another thing I do sometimes is ask "What to do before X?", omitting the "want" verbal phrase altogether. >>
This is not a bad way of phrasing it because it reminds one that the emphasis of the question should be "What do I want to do BEFORE x?" rather than "What do I WANT to do before x?"
April 29, 2012 at 0:12 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Matt:
<< I never suggested taking only the easiest tasks. The first task in the list might be the toughest task on the list. >>
It probably will be the one of the toughest tasks on the list if you apply your question consistently. So although I have reservations about it which I have already expressed, I don't think it will produce such a bad result as some people are suggesting.
If one follows the algorithm properly then there should be a definite step up in easiness at each stage, which therefore may mean that some quite difficult tasks are chosen early in the chain, followed by a short selection of easier tasks. This is to be contrasted with just having a long chain composed of all the easy tasks on the list.
For example if the first task on the list is the most difficult, and the second task on the list is the easiest, then one would have a chain of two tasks. More likely one would have a difficult task at the head of the chain, a slightly less difficult task next, then a short progression down to the easiest task on the list.
<< I never suggested taking only the easiest tasks. The first task in the list might be the toughest task on the list. >>
It probably will be the one of the toughest tasks on the list if you apply your question consistently. So although I have reservations about it which I have already expressed, I don't think it will produce such a bad result as some people are suggesting.
If one follows the algorithm properly then there should be a definite step up in easiness at each stage, which therefore may mean that some quite difficult tasks are chosen early in the chain, followed by a short selection of easier tasks. This is to be contrasted with just having a long chain composed of all the easy tasks on the list.
For example if the first task on the list is the most difficult, and the second task on the list is the easiest, then one would have a chain of two tasks. More likely one would have a difficult task at the head of the chain, a slightly less difficult task next, then a short progression down to the easiest task on the list.
April 29, 2012 at 0:21 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
I apply the principle of what to do before X and have made one small change.
This has to do with my first selection after the root item. I have approx 100 items on my list and the first +-50 items are all quite boring, meaning items that I do not want to do. (They are there for a reason!)
With my first selection after root: I will go down the list and find the first item that STANDS OUT as this will be most definately be the first item I WANT to do before the root item.
From theron I apply the rule diligently asking what I want to do before the 2nd selected item, then 3rd, etc.
The only reason I do this is to speed up my initial selection process.
This has to do with my first selection after the root item. I have approx 100 items on my list and the first +-50 items are all quite boring, meaning items that I do not want to do. (They are there for a reason!)
With my first selection after root: I will go down the list and find the first item that STANDS OUT as this will be most definately be the first item I WANT to do before the root item.
From theron I apply the rule diligently asking what I want to do before the 2nd selected item, then 3rd, etc.
The only reason I do this is to speed up my initial selection process.
April 29, 2012 at 7:12 |
Nico
Nico
Seraphim, Mark,
<<<< Another thing I do sometimes is ask "What to do before X?", omitting the "want" verbal phrase altogether. >>
This is not a bad way of phrasing it because it reminds one that the emphasis of the question should be "What do I want to do BEFORE x?" rather than "What do I WANT to do before x?">>
That sounds promising. I'll give "What to do BEFORE x?" a try. Thanks.
<<<< Another thing I do sometimes is ask "What to do before X?", omitting the "want" verbal phrase altogether. >>
This is not a bad way of phrasing it because it reminds one that the emphasis of the question should be "What do I want to do BEFORE x?" rather than "What do I WANT to do before x?">>
That sounds promising. I'll give "What to do BEFORE x?" a try. Thanks.
April 29, 2012 at 17:53 |
Bernie
Bernie
Based on Mark's comment, I think I'll try shortening it even more: "Before X?" :-)
<< This is not a bad way of phrasing it because it reminds one that the emphasis of the question should be "What do I want to do BEFORE x?" rather than "What do I WANT to do before x?" >>
<< This is not a bad way of phrasing it because it reminds one that the emphasis of the question should be "What do I want to do BEFORE x?" rather than "What do I WANT to do before x?" >>
April 29, 2012 at 18:09 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
I used "BEFORE x?" last night. I liked it.
April 29, 2012 at 18:17 |
Bernie
Bernie
Nice!
April 29, 2012 at 19:18 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Yesterday I shortened the question to only the period (".") part of the question mark, and immediately retired for the day. Sigh. No more tweaking for me.
April 30, 2012 at 19:42 |
Tiersian
Tiersian
Tiersian: LOL!
May 1, 2012 at 23:58 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Perhaps, for these folks it would be helpful to temporarily change the question to "What's easier than this?" Because in reality, we all naturally tend toward taking the path of least resistance – we like to float along rather than fight the current.
One of the beauty's of Mark's systems is how the perspective changes with the change in context. Given any closed list, what would a person really choose to do, if there wasn't any guilt? He'd choose the easiest task. Once the easiest task is done, the context has changed and now there is a new perspective. Viewing the list again, the person will look for the easiest task, which in reality was harder than the task he just completed. But, now with the new context, it has taken on the moniker of "easiest." Resistance to this task has subtly changed for the better.
Once the person has gotten to the last task, he can "get rid of it" by doing a little bit of work on it. But, here again, perspective changes. Most have experienced that just getting the folder out demonstrates that the resistance felt internally was misguided and significant work can be accomplished. And, even in the case where only a little bit of work is done, the next time the task comes up, the perspective has changed, because there isn't as much work to do on the task.
Perhaps, if those with trouble grasping the WANT would change the question to "What's easier than this?" for a while, they might development their own WANT, and thereby experience an 'aha' moment.
Their mantra could be "take the easy way out!"
Matt