Navigation
To Think About . . .
My Latest Book
Also available on Amazon.com, Amazon.fr, and other Amazons and bookshops worldwide!
Search This Site
Log-in
Latest Comments
Most Popular Content
My Other Books
Also, the root-task forcing function prevents one from neglecting anything for too long. I find that when a root task comes up that I really don't want to take action on, it's a good candidate for deletion (or off-list deferral). Either way, it thins the list.
Which gets us back to Alan's question...
"Why didn't Mark experience this? What kept his list to a manageable length...?
... It's likely because he only puts truly important things that need doing in the next few days on his list, doesn't overcommit himself too often, and works many chains a day while absolutely forcing himself to take action on the root task when he comes to it. Everything beyond a few days into the future goes into a reminder system.
In summary: You can put anything on your list — as long as it's truly important to do very soon!
Regardless, here's how I would add dismissal into FV when faced with an extremely long list of tasks:
1. At the start of the day draw a line underneath the oldest block of un-actioned tasks ala Mark's instructions for Autofocus 2:
"At the beginning of each day...draw a line after the first block of unactioned tasks (i.e. the oldest tasks that are still awaiting action). These tasks are now “on notice” for dismissal. The block may include any number of tasks, from one upwards."
2. Select your root task by scanning down from the oldest un-actioned non-dismissed task and dotting the first task that stands out as ready to be worked on. That is your root task. Continue preselecting as usual, and work your preselected list.
3. Again from Mark regarding Autofocus 2:
"At the beginning of the following day, all items before the line which have not been actioned are dismissed. The preferred way to dismiss items is to highlight them as this makes it easy to review them.
Then re-draw the line as before."
4. Add a task to your list to review your dismissed tasks, or, before doing your next preselecting, do as in Mark's instructions for Autofocus 4:
"The next time you come to the beginning of the list, you should finally cross off the highlighted tasks by deciding what to do with each one in turn. You may elect to abandon it, re-enter it on the Active List (with or without re-phrasing), or put it into a reminder system for review at a later date. In making the decision what to do with each task, you should look at the reasons why you haven’t done it yet."
<< In summary: You can put anything on your list — as long as it's truly important to do very soon! >>
I don't think that's accurate. Mark has always used these systems (starting with AF1) as "catch-all" systems. He lets the process of working the system guide him as to what is important.
True, when one does this consistently, one does develop a better sense of what will probably be important and what will probably end up as dross. But still, Mark has said very consistently that he doesn't do any conscious pre-filtering at all.
I don't think AF1 or FV were designed for people who already have a good sense of what's important enough to go on the list. So I don't think this is the key of Mark's success.
I'm wondering if he is continuing to use FV to manage those "other things" or whether he's gone off onto some new TM system. Or finally followed his wife into dropping TM systems altogether like any normal retired person. LOL
"I don't think that's accurate. Mark has always used these systems (starting with AF1) as "catch-all" systems. He lets the process of working the system guide him as to what is important."
... In FV, you let the process guide you as to what is urgent to you, not important. Now before anyone jumps in saying FV is not urgency-based, I would have them note that prior to releasing the FV instructions, Mark tried to warm people up to the idea that you don't prioritize by importance but rather by a non-deadline-chasing sense of urgency. And that urgency is guided by the level of importance you place on a task and that level of importance is guided by the task's due date or how long you are willing to put up with it being undone, which is all guided by the FV question.
Whether a task is important to begin with is whether you add it to your FV list or not. If it's on your FV list you have committed to doing it. You definitely do pre-filter your list by only writing down what you have committed to doing. Exactly as Mark described in the days leading up to FV's release.
Mark didn't add an outright dismissal process because the philosophy behind FV is unlike his previous systems. Again, if you add a task to an FV list you have committed to doing it, otherwise get it off your list and into a suitable idea repository or reminder system. However, if you put the task off long enough the system will put that task into the root position forcing you to make a decision. So in a sense, that is the dismissal process. The root task must be worked on, deleted and entered into a reminder system, deleted entirely, re-phrased and re-written at the end of the list, or if it *can't* be done because of conditions, it is to be crossed-out and re-written at the end of the list and the next oldest un-actioned task becomes the root.
I don't know what Mark exactly does, but for sure I can remember to have repeatedly read in his books about the dangers of overcommitting oneself to too many projects at once. Also, I remember to have read in the FV instructions a warning about the risk of literally killing the system by flooding it with too many actions/task at once.
I believe that the fact that FV (or any other system) theoretically can handle just about anything (even someday/maybe ideas as going to holiday on the moon) may trick us to think that we, as humain beings, do have unlimited resources and, hence, can handle just about everything at once.
I believe this is not the case, unfortunately. We do have limited time and resources. As far as myself is concerned, I have tried with the little and often principle applied to someday/maybe ideas that were not a top priority at that time, with the consequence of experiencing more stress because of the feeling of not investing my time and energy in what was more important at that time.
However, it is also true that someday/maybe ideas (or dreams if you like) may never turn into anything real if they are not transformed into projects or at least into any kind of physical action.
I believe that the key to solve this dilemma is to remember that we do need both a proper life planning system for short/medium/long term goals (that will help to make the right choices about what to focus on at any particular time) as well as a proper task processing system, such as FV, that will help to lower the resistance in getting things done.
if the two processes (life planning and task actioning) stay 'synchronized', the FV list will be relatively short and able to fulfill its mission, that is to handle efficiently the important stuff as well as the myriads of everyday tiny little things that need to be addressed as well in order to maintain order and balance in all aspects of life.
Easier to saying than doing? :-)
Wow. Well said. I agree with everything you wrote. Especially the need for a life planning system separate but in sync with a daily task processing/actioning system.
thanks for your reply :-)
I would be delighted if you and other people on the forum shared the way of managing the planning stage. What I do, in practice, is:
--- Best Year Yet for annual planning;
--- Someday/maybe list for capturing dreams, ideas for future goals, etc, revised from time to time and that provide inspiration for the Best Year Yet;
--- a very simple excel spreadsheet with Gantt functionality for all my goals and projects for the year. I revise this once a week (Sunday morning review) and, in this way, I can keep track of the progress of already started projects and when a new project is due and hence decide when to put it in the FV system for the actual processing. if possible, I tend not to start too many projects at once, especially if I don't have external deadlines attached to them. My metaphor about this is not to start reading another fiction book, until I have not finished the previous one.
--- if a project is too complicated I may have taken separate notes on it and thus, these are reviewed too during the week review.
--- once I have finished my weekly project review (usually it takes 15-30 minutes), I review my FV list and update it as necessary. in this way I make sure that it stays short and, more importantly, 'synchronized' with what is more important to me according to the general plan.
As you said, once a task is within the FV a commitment to di it as bein made, so it is important to keep the FV system moving by processing the task list swiftly. This is important, because otherwise, the planning stage will be affected too. when I am not processing the FV list fast enough for whatever reason, I can see building resistance at transferring tasks and projects from the master plan to the FV list. on the other hand, the more I do, the more I am inclined to make such transfers. It's like a dam on a river: if thr basin is full, adding new water will make only things worse. what is needed is to take old water away in order to put new water in.
This is the main reason why I'm so interested in methods about speeding up the FV processing method (see the decremental time boxing approach suggested by GMBW in another thread): the quicker one can get rid of the old stuff, the faster will be able to start afresh with new projects.
.