FV and FVP Forum > Some problems I have using the system at work
I understand where you come from, Walter, since I have exactly the same problem (except for me it’s composing music). My conclusion so far is to exclude those big projects from my FV list. I try to explain why:
If I am writing a piece, this will take several days or weeks or even months and for that I need several hours a day. I don’t need a reminder nor am I tempted to procrastinate work on this project (ok, sometimes I am, but not to the point that I’d need a method to deal with it). So my chains will include other tasks that need to be done.
I simply treat my composing projects differently: there are no special todos or steps, just work on the music (or software or code or the new book or whatever bigger creative work is on your plate). There is composing time, doing-stuff-time (where I need FV) and free time.
I hope that Mark will clarify how he deals with this problem. One can add the task "write music/code/book" to the list, of course, but I am not sure if it makes sense. This task would always remain in the bottom part of the list since I work on it every day. My workflow would look like this: I build my chain starting with the first task, add some more todos, always asking myself what I want to do before X and then I’d reach my composition todo (which is something I DON’T want to BEFORE the other todos, but AFTER them): it would hardly ever make it to my chain! So I decided for me that "composing" does not belong in my FV list.
If I am writing a piece, this will take several days or weeks or even months and for that I need several hours a day. I don’t need a reminder nor am I tempted to procrastinate work on this project (ok, sometimes I am, but not to the point that I’d need a method to deal with it). So my chains will include other tasks that need to be done.
I simply treat my composing projects differently: there are no special todos or steps, just work on the music (or software or code or the new book or whatever bigger creative work is on your plate). There is composing time, doing-stuff-time (where I need FV) and free time.
I hope that Mark will clarify how he deals with this problem. One can add the task "write music/code/book" to the list, of course, but I am not sure if it makes sense. This task would always remain in the bottom part of the list since I work on it every day. My workflow would look like this: I build my chain starting with the first task, add some more todos, always asking myself what I want to do before X and then I’d reach my composition todo (which is something I DON’T want to BEFORE the other todos, but AFTER them): it would hardly ever make it to my chain! So I decided for me that "composing" does not belong in my FV list.
May 6, 2012 at 12:45 |
David
David
Hi David,
In my case, the problem is that my project is what I really want to do before everything else, because I'm under pressure, and also because I want to finish it as soon as I can.
So maybe this is somehow related to the urgent vs. important concept.
But once I start, I can't really stop. Today I reviewed my list and I have a lot of old tasks undone (which are important, but nobody is going to fire me for not doing them on schedule :-)
In this, DWM was effective. Old tasks would just go away. If they waited enough, there's no point on watching them and feeling guilty for not doing them.
On the other hand, they weren't really disposable. They were and are important even if they disappeared. Well, at least some of them.
In my case, the problem is that my project is what I really want to do before everything else, because I'm under pressure, and also because I want to finish it as soon as I can.
So maybe this is somehow related to the urgent vs. important concept.
But once I start, I can't really stop. Today I reviewed my list and I have a lot of old tasks undone (which are important, but nobody is going to fire me for not doing them on schedule :-)
In this, DWM was effective. Old tasks would just go away. If they waited enough, there's no point on watching them and feeling guilty for not doing them.
On the other hand, they weren't really disposable. They were and are important even if they disappeared. Well, at least some of them.
May 6, 2012 at 13:14 |
Walter
Walter
Walter - what about setting aside a few hours a week to work on the little things? Or maybe the last 30-60 minutes of the day? (I 'm in the same position you're in, except I'm a couple steps before you on the development life cycle. ) Or if nothing else, do 1 or 2 whenever you're 'forced' to take a long-enough break to lose your train of thought anyway - meetings, lunch, first thing in the morning because the train starts :)
May 6, 2012 at 13:21 |
Lillian
Lillian
Hi Walter: different profession, but same problem. With all my files, papers, materials spread all over my desk and on my PC, there is quite a bit of overhead and cost involved in switching.
But I think FV does deal with it quite well. Knowing that the project you choose to dot will require focus and commitment over an extended period, the other tasks that tend to get dotted are usually of a magnitude lower in difficulty than the project you have chosen. So, the smaller tasks can be dealt with in short measure :quickly get your email, phone calls, filing, etc out of the way in reverse order, then settle down to the big task.
I deal with interruptions in the same way: if time permits, deal with the query, phone call or email (by marking it urgent and dealing with it) and get on with the main task.
Sometimes, of course, I do have the odd "seat-of-my-pants" moments, and have to deal with multiple urgent tasks, some of which don't even make it to the list (examples of these would be walk in client, time sensitive documents that need to completed). And by the time the day is over, I may not have even touched the big project.
Nevermind, come in tomorrow morning, tell all and sundry that the project needs completion or else our clients will suffer, and usually, I find the time to get to the finish line. I re-dot the project task and get on with it. I don't have a happy story to tell everyday, but at least, I keep myself sane.
I can imagine the difficulty you might have with several projects with roughly the same level of difficulty. There are times when I have 2 or 3 big things happening at the same time, but I make the best of it with FV.
I find that FV can keep your eye on the big things, even though there are times when you can't quite enough of them done in a day.
But I think FV does deal with it quite well. Knowing that the project you choose to dot will require focus and commitment over an extended period, the other tasks that tend to get dotted are usually of a magnitude lower in difficulty than the project you have chosen. So, the smaller tasks can be dealt with in short measure :quickly get your email, phone calls, filing, etc out of the way in reverse order, then settle down to the big task.
I deal with interruptions in the same way: if time permits, deal with the query, phone call or email (by marking it urgent and dealing with it) and get on with the main task.
Sometimes, of course, I do have the odd "seat-of-my-pants" moments, and have to deal with multiple urgent tasks, some of which don't even make it to the list (examples of these would be walk in client, time sensitive documents that need to completed). And by the time the day is over, I may not have even touched the big project.
Nevermind, come in tomorrow morning, tell all and sundry that the project needs completion or else our clients will suffer, and usually, I find the time to get to the finish line. I re-dot the project task and get on with it. I don't have a happy story to tell everyday, but at least, I keep myself sane.
I can imagine the difficulty you might have with several projects with roughly the same level of difficulty. There are times when I have 2 or 3 big things happening at the same time, but I make the best of it with FV.
I find that FV can keep your eye on the big things, even though there are times when you can't quite enough of them done in a day.
May 6, 2012 at 16:17 |
JD
JD
What about applying / incorporating the MIT technique of Leo Babauta? MIT stands for "Most Important Task"(s) of the day and is the minimum, but most important stuff you want to work on / achieve during the day. Google "Zen To Done" and "The Power of Less" to read more about it.
So the workflow would be:
- select the 3 MITs of the day from your FV list first thing in the morning,
- work on the 3 MITs before anything else,
- apply the FV rules and work your way through the list as usual for the rest of the day.
Just my 0.02.
So the workflow would be:
- select the 3 MITs of the day from your FV list first thing in the morning,
- work on the 3 MITs before anything else,
- apply the FV rules and work your way through the list as usual for the rest of the day.
Just my 0.02.
May 6, 2012 at 19:02 |
Stefano F. Rausch
Stefano F. Rausch
I am just starting up with FV, but my spin on this is that since its something you want to do, and you work on it each day, then its at the bottom of the list, and would be the first thing you do, using the FV last things first principle, right?
I think your only problem will be stopping with this first thing. But that is just a question of saying you will work on something for so many hours, and then move onto the next items..
Does this sound right?
I think your only problem will be stopping with this first thing. But that is just a question of saying you will work on something for so many hours, and then move onto the next items..
Does this sound right?
May 6, 2012 at 20:11 |
Grant
Grant
FV says to work on a task for as long as you want to.
Some days you'll dot several little things, then see the big one at the end and decide that list of little things should be done before you get into the big one. Other days you'll look at all the little things with dots and decide you want work on the big project first.
So, FV can work with big urgent important projects. I think, though, that if the environment allows, a routine would work better, especially if you can build it around your natural daily rhythm. It becomes a habit that re-inforces itself.
Some days you'll dot several little things, then see the big one at the end and decide that list of little things should be done before you get into the big one. Other days you'll look at all the little things with dots and decide you want work on the big project first.
So, FV can work with big urgent important projects. I think, though, that if the environment allows, a routine would work better, especially if you can build it around your natural daily rhythm. It becomes a habit that re-inforces itself.
May 7, 2012 at 1:59 |
Cricket
Cricket
Lillian – I thought about setting some period of time during the day, but I just checked my list, and discovered that half of my tasks are not really that small (as in "check mail"), but stuff that it doesn't make sense to even start before I get more free time.
It's the kind of task that doesn't really work with little and often as in a few minutes. They need at least an hour per session. "Test program x" doesn't translate well in "test a little of program x", and then go back to my big project. The "jump" is too difficult.
When at work, tasks like "call john", "answer mail", "clean desk" are fine. Those are either short or non urgent tasks.
It's the kind of task that doesn't really work with little and often as in a few minutes. They need at least an hour per session. "Test program x" doesn't translate well in "test a little of program x", and then go back to my big project. The "jump" is too difficult.
When at work, tasks like "call john", "answer mail", "clean desk" are fine. Those are either short or non urgent tasks.
May 7, 2012 at 8:51 |
Walter
Walter
JD:
"I can imagine the difficulty you might have with several projects with roughly the same level of difficulty. There are times when I have 2 or 3 big things happening at the same time, but I make the best of it with FV."
This is essentially the problem. Even if they are standalone tasks, they are big enough to interfere with my main project.
I could just essentially "don't want" to do anything from the beginning of the list until the end, where the main project is located, but then I'd have to deal with the first task, which could be completely incompatible. That's more or less the word I was looking for. Then I'd probably have to move it to the end, and start again hopefully with a simpler task.
Maybe this scenario will be different during calmer periods.
"I can imagine the difficulty you might have with several projects with roughly the same level of difficulty. There are times when I have 2 or 3 big things happening at the same time, but I make the best of it with FV."
This is essentially the problem. Even if they are standalone tasks, they are big enough to interfere with my main project.
I could just essentially "don't want" to do anything from the beginning of the list until the end, where the main project is located, but then I'd have to deal with the first task, which could be completely incompatible. That's more or less the word I was looking for. Then I'd probably have to move it to the end, and start again hopefully with a simpler task.
Maybe this scenario will be different during calmer periods.
May 7, 2012 at 9:41 |
Walter
Walter
I'll try to stick to the rules no matter what, and wait for a different period of activity to see how things work out.
Right now it will be a short ladder of only a few steps, where the top one will be moved from time to time.
I guess I'll be using this part of the instructions quite a bit:
"If the first task on the list can't be done now for some valid reason (e.g. wrong time of day, precondition not met, bad weather), then cross it out and re-enter it at the end of the list. Use the next task as your starting benchmark."
My valid reason would be "precondition not met". I hope I won't abuse it :-)
I really want to use FV for the complex tasks, not just the little ones.
Right now it will be a short ladder of only a few steps, where the top one will be moved from time to time.
I guess I'll be using this part of the instructions quite a bit:
"If the first task on the list can't be done now for some valid reason (e.g. wrong time of day, precondition not met, bad weather), then cross it out and re-enter it at the end of the list. Use the next task as your starting benchmark."
My valid reason would be "precondition not met". I hope I won't abuse it :-)
I really want to use FV for the complex tasks, not just the little ones.
May 7, 2012 at 9:52 |
Walter
Walter
Walter, what about making two FV lists - one for your big current project (choose just one), second for everything else. You can switch between them as you feel like - or invest predefined time blocks in each of them. I am doing something similar now - I have my "private practice FV list" (which is my biggest project at the moment) and "main FV list". That solves problem with mental "switching", which I know very well. For me, having only one big current project to focus on is most effective (of course, I have many projects at any moment, but I consider only one as main project). If you need to do 2 or 3 important project at once, you could even consider having more FV lists - for each main project. But it can be overkill. Just 2 lists are maybe better. (Hint: I have "switch to private practice FV list" as a recurring task in my main FV list. Hint2: you can change your "main project" as you want - just join the two FV lists into new main list and make a new special-project FV list.)
I would also recommend not to try to do ALL your important projects in parallel during the day, the mental switching is sometimes too hard. I personally make "project X day" or "project X week", which I can alternate with "project Y day" the other day. It is much easier than trying to switch to five different projects daily.
I would also recommend not to try to do ALL your important projects in parallel during the day, the mental switching is sometimes too hard. I personally make "project X day" or "project X week", which I can alternate with "project Y day" the other day. It is much easier than trying to switch to five different projects daily.
May 7, 2012 at 11:38 |
Daneb
Daneb
The way I see it, FV helps you to:
- quickly capture tasks that come up during the day
- select stuff to do (using Colley's Rule)
If you already know what to do, because something is urgent, or daily routine, I wouldn't use FV.
If I need to work on project X because of deadlines, or because I want to spend 1 hour per day on that project, I just do that. I use FV for when I have time and energy left for less urgent stuff, to help me make best use of my time.
- quickly capture tasks that come up during the day
- select stuff to do (using Colley's Rule)
If you already know what to do, because something is urgent, or daily routine, I wouldn't use FV.
If I need to work on project X because of deadlines, or because I want to spend 1 hour per day on that project, I just do that. I use FV for when I have time and energy left for less urgent stuff, to help me make best use of my time.
May 7, 2012 at 12:02 |
Thorin
Thorin
Thorin is right. FV is for managing your discretionary time. If you know you want to work project(s) for x hours per day, then you already know that time isn't discretionary. Go do your project. But for working through all the other crap that we have on our lists, use FV per the rules. It really works.
If you have several projects and need to choose among them without specifically planning out your schedule, put them all on FV. Let it help you sort them out. Don't force how you interpret "Want" in the The Question and remember the key word really is "Before". The specialty of FV is its ability to get stuff into a good sequence for productive use of your time.
I also don't recommend skipping the base task. Even when I really would rather just create a new ladder to get to something toward the end of the list, if there is ANYTHING I can do on it I start doing it. Sometimes it results in real breakthroughs on stuff that's been lingering and it usually doesn't take a lot of time to progress these tasks a little. Your brain will have been working on them in the background as they get closer.
If you have several projects and need to choose among them without specifically planning out your schedule, put them all on FV. Let it help you sort them out. Don't force how you interpret "Want" in the The Question and remember the key word really is "Before". The specialty of FV is its ability to get stuff into a good sequence for productive use of your time.
I also don't recommend skipping the base task. Even when I really would rather just create a new ladder to get to something toward the end of the list, if there is ANYTHING I can do on it I start doing it. Sometimes it results in real breakthroughs on stuff that's been lingering and it usually doesn't take a lot of time to progress these tasks a little. Your brain will have been working on them in the background as they get closer.
May 7, 2012 at 13:07 |
MartyH
MartyH
Yes, I guess that's the problem... I've been through this before.
I always have difficulty determining what's discretionary and what's not.
What kind of tasks should I put on the list?
Things that don't have a strict deadline?
Things that can wait for some time, that can wait forever, or that are optional at all?
Can things that need to be done but not right now be considered discretionary?
For example: "Fix bug #290348"
The bug exists. The system still works, but sometime in the future I'll have to deal with it.
Can that go in my discretionary list?
Or is it only for things like "Delete backup files", "Update documentation", "Search for new provider"?
I tend to try to use Mark's systems to manage my work tasks (things that I MUST do, and asap), because that's something that I really need.
I'd like to use something smarter than a simple list. I wish that there were methods to use FV or AF with these kind of tasks as well.
Is there something like that, that someone can recommend?
I guess this is moving out of the FV boundaries…. My apologies.
I always have difficulty determining what's discretionary and what's not.
What kind of tasks should I put on the list?
Things that don't have a strict deadline?
Things that can wait for some time, that can wait forever, or that are optional at all?
Can things that need to be done but not right now be considered discretionary?
For example: "Fix bug #290348"
The bug exists. The system still works, but sometime in the future I'll have to deal with it.
Can that go in my discretionary list?
Or is it only for things like "Delete backup files", "Update documentation", "Search for new provider"?
I tend to try to use Mark's systems to manage my work tasks (things that I MUST do, and asap), because that's something that I really need.
I'd like to use something smarter than a simple list. I wish that there were methods to use FV or AF with these kind of tasks as well.
Is there something like that, that someone can recommend?
I guess this is moving out of the FV boundaries…. My apologies.
May 7, 2012 at 15:38 |
Walter
Walter
Well, I don't agree with the notion that if you want to work on your project X hours/day, it is non-discretionary time which should not be controlled by FV. With the same logic, you could call your 9-5 work "non-discretionary" because you have your fixed hours, fixed goals, fixed responsibilities. Non-discretionary times is in my opinion: appointments, meetings, travelling = hard times/dates in your calendar. If you want to work on project or in special context for several hours every day, I would call it "project blocks" or "context blocks" and you can use FV pretty well with it: you can use either special FV list for it (in the way as many people use separate home and work list. Or I use one "main project" FV list besides normal FV list). Or you can use one FV list and during the project blocks slightly change the question to "what from (___project X, ___context Y) do I want to do before this task?".
You can put deadlines next to your tasks in FV. You can mark the most important. This can also help you when choosing the tasks. My experience is that you can really trust the process, as long as you are going through the list more times a day, so it is also good not to make too long ladder.
You can put deadlines next to your tasks in FV. You can mark the most important. This can also help you when choosing the tasks. My experience is that you can really trust the process, as long as you are going through the list more times a day, so it is also good not to make too long ladder.
May 7, 2012 at 16:01 |
Daneb
Daneb
An FV list for each project?
Mine is varied enough to include phone calls, meeting arrangements, writing documentation, working on different modules, and of course, programming...
Things like that wouldn't interfere with each other as in everything in one bag.
Are they "discretionary" inside a context?
That's intriguing... FV project management. Interesting.
Mine is varied enough to include phone calls, meeting arrangements, writing documentation, working on different modules, and of course, programming...
Things like that wouldn't interfere with each other as in everything in one bag.
Are they "discretionary" inside a context?
That's intriguing... FV project management. Interesting.
May 7, 2012 at 16:13 |
Walter
Walter
I'll try that.
May 7, 2012 at 16:16 |
Walter
Walter
@Walter
What I put in is everything I'd like to work on 'now'. If bug #290348 is really unimportant and you have a lot of other more urgent/importent stuff you can choose to:
- just leave the bug in, never fix it;
- delegate: let someone else fix it;
- work a little on it every time it's at the top of your FV list;
- enter it in your calendar, e.g. 6 months from now, then in 6 months you can choose to add it to your FV list;
- enter it in a bugs list, and make a task in FV to remind you to check this bugs list every now and then;
I do add urgent stuff in my FV list, but if there's a deadline I will also add a reminder in my calendar, set an alarm, write it on my hand etc..
I've tweaked FV a little: I will highlight tasks that are not really important nor urgent, treat them as though they are crossed out, and every now and then review all highlighted tasks to reevaluate them.
@Daneb
My main point is: FV is a tool, use it when you need it, and not when you don't need it: if your urgent project has several tasks, you could use the FV selection mechanism to select the most urgent tasks, but as long as you already know what's urgent and what you need to do, then don't use FV, because it probably feels like a pointless exercise to reach a conclusion you've already made.
What I put in is everything I'd like to work on 'now'. If bug #290348 is really unimportant and you have a lot of other more urgent/importent stuff you can choose to:
- just leave the bug in, never fix it;
- delegate: let someone else fix it;
- work a little on it every time it's at the top of your FV list;
- enter it in your calendar, e.g. 6 months from now, then in 6 months you can choose to add it to your FV list;
- enter it in a bugs list, and make a task in FV to remind you to check this bugs list every now and then;
I do add urgent stuff in my FV list, but if there's a deadline I will also add a reminder in my calendar, set an alarm, write it on my hand etc..
I've tweaked FV a little: I will highlight tasks that are not really important nor urgent, treat them as though they are crossed out, and every now and then review all highlighted tasks to reevaluate them.
@Daneb
My main point is: FV is a tool, use it when you need it, and not when you don't need it: if your urgent project has several tasks, you could use the FV selection mechanism to select the most urgent tasks, but as long as you already know what's urgent and what you need to do, then don't use FV, because it probably feels like a pointless exercise to reach a conclusion you've already made.
May 7, 2012 at 16:28 |
Thorin
Thorin
Well, I would not mean FV list for EACH project, just for the "main" current project or for main locations as I suggest above. Going above 2-3 lists would be overcomplicated for me. But your situation/personality might be different, so why not to try. As usually, experiment is best way how to find out.
May 7, 2012 at 16:28 |
Daneb
Daneb
@Thorin: yes, I agree and I do not use FV when it is obvious what to do. However it is urgency and urgency. I am not speaking about the situation when you need to stop everything and to go to fix a problem. But for "less" urgent tasks like projects with approaching deadline I consider FV more than valuable tool - it helps me to sort between various levels of urgencies. Because the question "what do I want to do before..." translates to me as "what is more urgent, more important and what I am more ready to do...at the moment"
May 7, 2012 at 16:35 |
Daneb
Daneb
Ok,
I started to build the tasks list for the big project, but as expected, most of them are dependent on finishing the previous ones.
I could build a generic small list like:
Program
Write documentation
Review project with my boss
...
But that flow is already inside my head on autopilot.
I started to build the tasks list for the big project, but as expected, most of them are dependent on finishing the previous ones.
I could build a generic small list like:
Program
Write documentation
Review project with my boss
...
But that flow is already inside my head on autopilot.
May 7, 2012 at 16:40 |
Walter
Walter
Thorin, you wrote
"- enter it in a bugs list, and make a task in FV to remind you to check this bugs list every now and then;"
I already have a system for managing issues/bugs, but I wanted to manage that list in a better fashion, instead of browsing the whole list and giving priorities.
My attempt to mix each bug inside the main list didn't work. I guess the "throw everything inside without thinking" doesn't apply here.
But I could, as you suggest, have a task to remind me of checking the list of bugs.
And when I reach that task, here's something I could try:
I could keep another FV list containing *only* bugs, and manage it with FV (I don't know how that would work)
The bugs list would act as an FV sublist. After I finish working on it, I could go back to the main list, reenter the "check bugs sublist" at the end, and continue working from the position where I left.
The sublist should keep its own state, meaning that the next time I get to it, the internal chain should stay as I left it.
If I keep several sublists, it would act like a tree, in computing jargon. Potentially, each sublist could contain its own sublists, but my head hurts just thinking about it.
"- enter it in a bugs list, and make a task in FV to remind you to check this bugs list every now and then;"
I already have a system for managing issues/bugs, but I wanted to manage that list in a better fashion, instead of browsing the whole list and giving priorities.
My attempt to mix each bug inside the main list didn't work. I guess the "throw everything inside without thinking" doesn't apply here.
But I could, as you suggest, have a task to remind me of checking the list of bugs.
And when I reach that task, here's something I could try:
I could keep another FV list containing *only* bugs, and manage it with FV (I don't know how that would work)
The bugs list would act as an FV sublist. After I finish working on it, I could go back to the main list, reenter the "check bugs sublist" at the end, and continue working from the position where I left.
The sublist should keep its own state, meaning that the next time I get to it, the internal chain should stay as I left it.
If I keep several sublists, it would act like a tree, in computing jargon. Potentially, each sublist could contain its own sublists, but my head hurts just thinking about it.
May 7, 2012 at 17:11 |
Walter
Walter
Walter: as I do it: I write in FV list only tasks which are actual = not dependent on any previous ones + I want to do them in next 7-14 days. The rest goes to separate project list (where I put plans, alternatives, schemes, future tasks, maybe tasks...) which I consult when I have "lack" of project tasks in FV or when I finish previous one and I do not know what to do next. But usually, I write down new task (in a hypothetical "chain" of project tasks) immediately after completing previous one in FV, and I do not have to look into my project list - I know by memory what to do next. So I do not put my whole project plan into FV, just actual, current tasks.
If small tasks of the project are already in your head, write only "work on project X" into FV. That is enough, isnt it?
If small tasks of the project are already in your head, write only "work on project X" into FV. That is enough, isnt it?
May 7, 2012 at 17:12 |
Daneb
Daneb
@Walter:
'I could keep another FV list containing *only* bugs, and manage it with FV (I don't know how that would work)'
Sounds good.
I also have a main FV list on my computer, but a separate paper list for stuff to do in the house, not on the computer, like cleaning or garden work. When I need a break from working at the computer, I switch to my paper list, where I'll apply the FV principles. It's like the GTD context idea, where you have different lists for different contexts.
It's probably more efficient to fix bugs in a batch, and not mix it with other tasks, so it makes sense to keep it in a separate list, and apply the FV principles to that list.
If you're in an IT project, you probably need to discuss the priority of bugs with the business or testers, but I think FV still would work.
'I could keep another FV list containing *only* bugs, and manage it with FV (I don't know how that would work)'
Sounds good.
I also have a main FV list on my computer, but a separate paper list for stuff to do in the house, not on the computer, like cleaning or garden work. When I need a break from working at the computer, I switch to my paper list, where I'll apply the FV principles. It's like the GTD context idea, where you have different lists for different contexts.
It's probably more efficient to fix bugs in a batch, and not mix it with other tasks, so it makes sense to keep it in a separate list, and apply the FV principles to that list.
If you're in an IT project, you probably need to discuss the priority of bugs with the business or testers, but I think FV still would work.
May 7, 2012 at 17:41 |
Thorin
Thorin
We've discussed this issue many times on the AF forum (now the "general" forum?).
Personally I've found that little and often works very well even with those tasks that I used to think could not be broken down in this way - such as programming. It always seemed to take a long time to transition and get into "the zone".
But I've found that 80% of the time, that's just not true, it's a kind of resistance. I did a little exercise for awhile - setting a timer, and ** immediately stopping my work ** when the timer sounded. Even if mid-sentence writing a document or email, or in the middle of writing a bit of code, or whatever. Just STOP. And go do something else. Then come back.
This helped me get used to stopping and starting WHENEVER I WANT. Not waiting for "the zone" to happen. Now I can get into "the zone" so much easier. If I have 10 minutes till my next meeting, I can actually do productive work in that time, because I can immediately get into "the zone" on my next task, and then immediately stop when the time comes.
This is certainly not true 100% of the time. It's not so easy to keep doing this when I'm tired or have a headache or just suffered through 4 hours of back-to-back meetings. But I learned a LOT by forcing myself to "think outside the box" in terms of how much time I need to "ramp up" for a particular task, and how hard it REALLY is to switch tasks.
The advantage to this hard-core little-and-often approach is (1) I don't need to wait till I'm in the right mood to start a task, (2) I can make far better use of little snippets of time, which seems to be how my days are broken up lately, (3) interruptions don't bother me as much, (4) I can get into "the zone" a lot more quickly, at least most of the time. The disadvantages are ... well, actually, I can't think of any.
I also learned that being "in the zone" isn't always such a great thing. Sometimes we get fixated on one idea, one approach, one algorithm, and keep going down that trail till it's all finished and developed. Sometimes an interruption that snaps us out of "the zone" is actually a blessing in disguise, because it breaks us out of that "trance" and helps us look at things from a slightly different perspective, perhaps more holistically.
So, practically, I manage everything on one FV list, and really just do work as long as I want on each task. Sometimes it's 1 minute, sometimes it's all day. It's typically 20 to 40 minutes or so, maybe an hour or two for things that are more in-depth.
Personally I've found that little and often works very well even with those tasks that I used to think could not be broken down in this way - such as programming. It always seemed to take a long time to transition and get into "the zone".
But I've found that 80% of the time, that's just not true, it's a kind of resistance. I did a little exercise for awhile - setting a timer, and ** immediately stopping my work ** when the timer sounded. Even if mid-sentence writing a document or email, or in the middle of writing a bit of code, or whatever. Just STOP. And go do something else. Then come back.
This helped me get used to stopping and starting WHENEVER I WANT. Not waiting for "the zone" to happen. Now I can get into "the zone" so much easier. If I have 10 minutes till my next meeting, I can actually do productive work in that time, because I can immediately get into "the zone" on my next task, and then immediately stop when the time comes.
This is certainly not true 100% of the time. It's not so easy to keep doing this when I'm tired or have a headache or just suffered through 4 hours of back-to-back meetings. But I learned a LOT by forcing myself to "think outside the box" in terms of how much time I need to "ramp up" for a particular task, and how hard it REALLY is to switch tasks.
The advantage to this hard-core little-and-often approach is (1) I don't need to wait till I'm in the right mood to start a task, (2) I can make far better use of little snippets of time, which seems to be how my days are broken up lately, (3) interruptions don't bother me as much, (4) I can get into "the zone" a lot more quickly, at least most of the time. The disadvantages are ... well, actually, I can't think of any.
I also learned that being "in the zone" isn't always such a great thing. Sometimes we get fixated on one idea, one approach, one algorithm, and keep going down that trail till it's all finished and developed. Sometimes an interruption that snaps us out of "the zone" is actually a blessing in disguise, because it breaks us out of that "trance" and helps us look at things from a slightly different perspective, perhaps more holistically.
So, practically, I manage everything on one FV list, and really just do work as long as I want on each task. Sometimes it's 1 minute, sometimes it's all day. It's typically 20 to 40 minutes or so, maybe an hour or two for things that are more in-depth.
May 7, 2012 at 23:07 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Walter,
I have the same issue. Before FV, I would either put off these big projects or spend so much time on them, I did not get any other tasks done. Many times when I did finish my big project, I felt so burnt out, I would get nothing accomplished the next day.
With FV it has worked out very well. I have gotten the big projects done and kept up with the small tasks also.
In the FV list I only write the name of the project. When I dot my FV list I usually only pick 3-4 tasks. Usually the big project is the first one in the list, so the other tasks serve as a warm-up to getting started. When I start working on the project, I make a project FV list on a piece of paper or tablet that I keep with the project folder if needed. For projects that have a lot of resistance I use the FV to process the project. When I am done working on the project (but have not completed the project), my separate project FV list goes in the file with a note if needed on where to begin again. On my main FV list I reenter the project.
Hope this helps,
Jennifer
I have the same issue. Before FV, I would either put off these big projects or spend so much time on them, I did not get any other tasks done. Many times when I did finish my big project, I felt so burnt out, I would get nothing accomplished the next day.
With FV it has worked out very well. I have gotten the big projects done and kept up with the small tasks also.
In the FV list I only write the name of the project. When I dot my FV list I usually only pick 3-4 tasks. Usually the big project is the first one in the list, so the other tasks serve as a warm-up to getting started. When I start working on the project, I make a project FV list on a piece of paper or tablet that I keep with the project folder if needed. For projects that have a lot of resistance I use the FV to process the project. When I am done working on the project (but have not completed the project), my separate project FV list goes in the file with a note if needed on where to begin again. On my main FV list I reenter the project.
Hope this helps,
Jennifer
May 8, 2012 at 19:42 |
Jennifer
Jennifer
I found many complex jobs I thought had to be done in one sitting are better broken up. Not all of them, but enough that it's worth trying often.
Knowing that I had only a limited time forced me to plan the work better and to take notes for the next session, and that made me realize how useful the notes are. Rather than keeping all the spinning plates and connections and things to check in my head, I wrote them down. By the end of a long session, I was usually burnt out and would miss details. Making notes prevented that. They also helped when I was interrupted. Also, sometimes I'd have an idea for another chapter. Rather than remembering, or going right to it, I made a note.
Like I said, it doesn't work for all projects, but it helps enough of them that it's worth the learning curve.
Knowing that I had only a limited time forced me to plan the work better and to take notes for the next session, and that made me realize how useful the notes are. Rather than keeping all the spinning plates and connections and things to check in my head, I wrote them down. By the end of a long session, I was usually burnt out and would miss details. Making notes prevented that. They also helped when I was interrupted. Also, sometimes I'd have an idea for another chapter. Rather than remembering, or going right to it, I made a note.
Like I said, it doesn't work for all projects, but it helps enough of them that it's worth the learning curve.
May 9, 2012 at 1:15 |
Cricket
Cricket
I haven't read the whole of this discussion so apologies if I'm repeating things already said by other people.
First "discretionary time" is any time in which you have a choice of what to do. In other words you have a choice whether to work on Project X or answer your email or play solitaire.
Non-discretionary time would include meetings, appointments, presentations, etc. Basically the stuff you have in your schedule with a time against it.
With a huge project you have a choice of doing it in discretionary time or non-discretionary time.
If you decide to do it in discretionary time then you manage it using FV (or whatever system you prefer).
If you decide to do it in non-discretionary time, you set aside a specific period of time daily. Ideally this time period should have a start-time and a finish-time. You may want to have more or less than one session in a day, but however many you have they should be blocked out in your schedule and ring-fenced. The more closely you stick to the start and finish times the more effective this is likely to be.
If you have more than one huge project then you might do one in the morning and one in the afternoon, or do them on alternate days. I would not advise having more than two non-discretionary projects like this at any one time. All other projects should be managed as discretionary time projects. You can promote a project to non-discretionary when one of the existing non-discretionary projects gets finished.
First "discretionary time" is any time in which you have a choice of what to do. In other words you have a choice whether to work on Project X or answer your email or play solitaire.
Non-discretionary time would include meetings, appointments, presentations, etc. Basically the stuff you have in your schedule with a time against it.
With a huge project you have a choice of doing it in discretionary time or non-discretionary time.
If you decide to do it in discretionary time then you manage it using FV (or whatever system you prefer).
If you decide to do it in non-discretionary time, you set aside a specific period of time daily. Ideally this time period should have a start-time and a finish-time. You may want to have more or less than one session in a day, but however many you have they should be blocked out in your schedule and ring-fenced. The more closely you stick to the start and finish times the more effective this is likely to be.
If you have more than one huge project then you might do one in the morning and one in the afternoon, or do them on alternate days. I would not advise having more than two non-discretionary projects like this at any one time. All other projects should be managed as discretionary time projects. You can promote a project to non-discretionary when one of the existing non-discretionary projects gets finished.
May 9, 2012 at 15:50 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Hi,
These last days are an example of how I'm working. All my time was invested in the project.
I couldn't even check the replies here, nor open my FV list. Well, maybe not couldn't, but didn't. (At home I'm too exhausted so I'm basically just sleeping, eating...)
I guess that yes, I really need to start to allocate a certain amount of time for the project and another one for the rest of the tasks. I'll need to set an alarm, otherwise I won't stop working on the project until the end of the day.
Mark, I liked the options you present for dealing with projects (choosing between discretionary time or non-discretionary time). Thanks for the explanations.
As for FV, I was wondering why I feel more pressure with it than with other systems (especially DWM), so I basically don't open the list.
I guess that the chain/ladder concept involves more commitment. In time-based DWM I could even leave my list closed for a period of time, and old tasks disappeared. It was a little like cheating. I could work non-stop on the big projects, and still keep a small list of tasks (very convenient).
Thanks for everyone's suggestions. I'll implement some ideas and see how things work.
I'm going to bookmark this thread, because I have a tendency to forget about this issue.
Walter
These last days are an example of how I'm working. All my time was invested in the project.
I couldn't even check the replies here, nor open my FV list. Well, maybe not couldn't, but didn't. (At home I'm too exhausted so I'm basically just sleeping, eating...)
I guess that yes, I really need to start to allocate a certain amount of time for the project and another one for the rest of the tasks. I'll need to set an alarm, otherwise I won't stop working on the project until the end of the day.
Mark, I liked the options you present for dealing with projects (choosing between discretionary time or non-discretionary time). Thanks for the explanations.
As for FV, I was wondering why I feel more pressure with it than with other systems (especially DWM), so I basically don't open the list.
I guess that the chain/ladder concept involves more commitment. In time-based DWM I could even leave my list closed for a period of time, and old tasks disappeared. It was a little like cheating. I could work non-stop on the big projects, and still keep a small list of tasks (very convenient).
Thanks for everyone's suggestions. I'll implement some ideas and see how things work.
I'm going to bookmark this thread, because I have a tendency to forget about this issue.
Walter
May 13, 2012 at 16:48 |
Walter
Walter
I've come to the same conclusion as Seraphim and Cricket:
For years (decades), I swore that my major creative projects required long, uninterrupted blocks of time, that Mark's "little & often" was absurd. But then I tried it. Professionally, I write code or compose various information-rich documents. Personally, I create music and multimedia projects. Opening a project and doing "a little bit of work" sounded ridiculous, but I have to say, it's the most sensible thing ever.
You won't appreciate why until you try it. At the very least, you'll discover that you're not like Seraphim and Cricket and me, and Mark, and you'll know to tune us out. ;)
Here is a tool that has helped me: flexible timeboxing for major projects within FV:
http://www.markforster.net/fv-forum/post/1778968#item1824238
Of course, you can schedule your major projects to a specific time of day, but I find that as unreliable as self-imposed deadlines.
For years (decades), I swore that my major creative projects required long, uninterrupted blocks of time, that Mark's "little & often" was absurd. But then I tried it. Professionally, I write code or compose various information-rich documents. Personally, I create music and multimedia projects. Opening a project and doing "a little bit of work" sounded ridiculous, but I have to say, it's the most sensible thing ever.
You won't appreciate why until you try it. At the very least, you'll discover that you're not like Seraphim and Cricket and me, and Mark, and you'll know to tune us out. ;)
Here is a tool that has helped me: flexible timeboxing for major projects within FV:
http://www.markforster.net/fv-forum/post/1778968#item1824238
Of course, you can schedule your major projects to a specific time of day, but I find that as unreliable as self-imposed deadlines.
May 13, 2012 at 23:33 |
Bernie
Bernie
Bernie wrote: << Of course, you can schedule your major projects to a specific time of day, but I find that as unreliable as self-imposed deadlines. >>
DITTO!
DITTO!
May 19, 2012 at 1:06 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Bernie wrote: << Of course, you can schedule your major projects to a specific time of day, but I find that as unreliable as self-imposed deadlines. >>
<< DITTO! >>
Ditto here, too, with some exceptions.
I find exercise is best done with a schedule, linked to something else. I walk my daughter to school most days (it's nice time together), and then continue another km or five -- before I even look at my list for the day. That works better than waiting till later. Laundry is best started early in the day so I can get it on the line and in (or through the dryer) on time.
The pattern seems to be grouping activities, and those where the scheduling makes a difference.
Other things, I don't respect the schedules. "Why is that project so important that it gets daily attention, when the rest don't?"
<< DITTO! >>
Ditto here, too, with some exceptions.
I find exercise is best done with a schedule, linked to something else. I walk my daughter to school most days (it's nice time together), and then continue another km or five -- before I even look at my list for the day. That works better than waiting till later. Laundry is best started early in the day so I can get it on the line and in (or through the dryer) on time.
The pattern seems to be grouping activities, and those where the scheduling makes a difference.
Other things, I don't respect the schedules. "Why is that project so important that it gets daily attention, when the rest don't?"
May 22, 2012 at 15:53 |
Cricket
Cricket
I'm struggling with using the system at work. This is something that happened with the previous systems as well, but I'm finding it more problematic with FV (because of the chain concept).
I have several small tasks that can be started and ended in one or a few sessions, but also some longer ones (small projects), which are the main "hot" tasks, that require most of my effort, meaning that I need to invest long periods of my daily time working on them.
These should be finished as soon as possible (are less optional than the others).
I divided the projects into short steps, so I could make sure that I don't invest all of the time in them.
The problems is that working a little on each project, makes things difficult, because then I have to make a mental "switch", which in my line of work is problematic (I'm a programmer and these tasks are usually full of math and algorithms). The jumping around stresses me a lot.
I suspect that these projects don't suit to be used with the system, and that I should leave mostly the smaller, more specific tasks, which are also more flexible regarding timelines (if they have one at all). But when I tried this, I've found that I didn't work on the other tasks at all, only on the big ones.
What should I do?
(I apologize If this has been discussed, I can't browse the forums as much as I used to).
Thanks,
Walter