FV and FVP Forum > A system should be a pleasure to use.
Michael,
This is a very thought provoking post. I have always maintained that using someone's canned time management system can be problematic for many. The reason is that it may or may not address the specific issues that one has with time management.Additionally it may have a huge overhead that is not needed for one's situation. I have focused on the issue of motivation and found that many procrastinators have unrealistic expectations for TM in general and/or use TM as a procrastination device. For me the simpler a system is the more pleasurable it is to use. Rules make things unpleasurable for me. Good thread
Gerry
This is a very thought provoking post. I have always maintained that using someone's canned time management system can be problematic for many. The reason is that it may or may not address the specific issues that one has with time management.Additionally it may have a huge overhead that is not needed for one's situation. I have focused on the issue of motivation and found that many procrastinators have unrealistic expectations for TM in general and/or use TM as a procrastination device. For me the simpler a system is the more pleasurable it is to use. Rules make things unpleasurable for me. Good thread
Gerry
August 28, 2012 at 16:08 |
Gerry
Gerry
Agreed -- it it's not a pleasure, it won't get used.
For me, much of the pleasure of a system comes from confidence. If I follow it, even somewhat-vaguely, I will get my work done.
To do that, I need to know it won't leave me burned-out from too much of one type of task at a time. It will allow me to take advantage of each type of energy when I have it.
I often look for the reason behind the rules. A good understanding means you know when you can break them. If there's not a good reason, then it's either arbitrary (more on that later) or bad.
Arbitrary rules have their place. FlyLady says start with the kitchen sink. Why that? It was the first thing she chose as she climbed out of a terrible life. Sometimes people argue. "Why the kitchen sink? Why not the bathroom sink or the shoe rack?" Yet these are the very people who say, "Tell me where to start!" They could have cleaned all three places in the time they spent arguing over which one to do first.
I find that time management systems all have the same weak point. They're great at the start. They're fun. Several easy or highly-desired tasks float to the top. Sometimes they give you the incentive to finish something really nasty. And then the daily grind starts, and they fail. Remember the tasks that you didn't want to do under the old system? Chances are, you won't want to do them under this system, either.
Some systems have other weak points, and some can help you plan the daily grind better, but none can protect you from it.
For me, much of the pleasure of a system comes from confidence. If I follow it, even somewhat-vaguely, I will get my work done.
To do that, I need to know it won't leave me burned-out from too much of one type of task at a time. It will allow me to take advantage of each type of energy when I have it.
I often look for the reason behind the rules. A good understanding means you know when you can break them. If there's not a good reason, then it's either arbitrary (more on that later) or bad.
Arbitrary rules have their place. FlyLady says start with the kitchen sink. Why that? It was the first thing she chose as she climbed out of a terrible life. Sometimes people argue. "Why the kitchen sink? Why not the bathroom sink or the shoe rack?" Yet these are the very people who say, "Tell me where to start!" They could have cleaned all three places in the time they spent arguing over which one to do first.
I find that time management systems all have the same weak point. They're great at the start. They're fun. Several easy or highly-desired tasks float to the top. Sometimes they give you the incentive to finish something really nasty. And then the daily grind starts, and they fail. Remember the tasks that you didn't want to do under the old system? Chances are, you won't want to do them under this system, either.
Some systems have other weak points, and some can help you plan the daily grind better, but none can protect you from it.
August 28, 2012 at 18:22 |
Cricket
Cricket
That's exactly why I always take initial results of any system, tweak or experiment with a grain of salt. What seems great at first may turn out to be a disappointment down the road. I had high hopes for FV, and it seemed to be initially effective, and Prioritized FV was more effective, but ultimately the FV approach was a disappointment to me; Autofocus-style systems resonate more with me. Others obviously have different experiences.
Having given up on FV, I decided to try tweaking AF1 to add prioritization (which I find to be an indispensable feature) and that was working well, but the simplicity of nuntym's AF2ND system appealed to me, so I applied a similar priority tweak to make AF2ND+, which I'm quite happy with. At the moment, it feels like the best variant of any of Mark's systems -- at least for me -- but I won't be surprised if I decide a couple months from now to switch again.
For what it's worth, I do believe there's a good chance that AF2ND+ can stand the test of time, but time will tell -- as always. So far, I think I'm the only one using it.
Having given up on FV, I decided to try tweaking AF1 to add prioritization (which I find to be an indispensable feature) and that was working well, but the simplicity of nuntym's AF2ND system appealed to me, so I applied a similar priority tweak to make AF2ND+, which I'm quite happy with. At the moment, it feels like the best variant of any of Mark's systems -- at least for me -- but I won't be surprised if I decide a couple months from now to switch again.
For what it's worth, I do believe there's a good chance that AF2ND+ can stand the test of time, but time will tell -- as always. So far, I think I'm the only one using it.
August 28, 2012 at 18:32 |
Deven
Deven
when in college I had a most difficult time getting anything done. as much as I tried systems and beat up on myself about how I never got anything done, I'd still not get anything done. even when did make progress, I'd find a way to screw things up. finally I explored some simple form of a visualization method which I'd read about. seeing feeling getting things done, what it felt like when done, that sort of thing. wow, magically I started getting things done. this included just sort of figuring out and also finding methods that solved what I needed when I needed it.
so for the people who keep not getting things done no matter what method they try, this could be part of OR the problem.
which brings me back to Mark's dreams method. what I'd like to solve (self, Mark or all of us) is combine both visualize/dreams AND a system such as FV. that seems the ideal combo.
and honestly something I need now. back then I was not seeing myself doing the coursework, so changing to seeing self doing that solved things. but I DID know what I needed to get done (the coursework). while I still know this technique now, I'm drifting somewhat in that I don't seem to know any more what I want to get done, as part of bigger goal, no longer sure where I'm heading. so need to work on what the purpose, big goals are. I think dreams covered that as well.
so for the people who keep not getting things done no matter what method they try, this could be part of OR the problem.
which brings me back to Mark's dreams method. what I'd like to solve (self, Mark or all of us) is combine both visualize/dreams AND a system such as FV. that seems the ideal combo.
and honestly something I need now. back then I was not seeing myself doing the coursework, so changing to seeing self doing that solved things. but I DID know what I needed to get done (the coursework). while I still know this technique now, I'm drifting somewhat in that I don't seem to know any more what I want to get done, as part of bigger goal, no longer sure where I'm heading. so need to work on what the purpose, big goals are. I think dreams covered that as well.
September 4, 2012 at 21:07 |
matthewS
matthewS
What was visualized in your college system?
In my current experiment, I have two lists, namely "everything", and "committed". I arrange these on alternating pages. Since I only work on committed items, the committed pages show me the things I did, without the clutter of things I might do or things I added but dropped.
To your bigger question of setting goals, I'm not yet seeing a way to integrate that into a doing system, and I'm not sure it's needed. I'm presently reading through The Compound Effect and implementing the worksheets and charts it advises. There is some redundancy with the task list, but it's more thought-oriented and recording progress is very easy compared to running a task list.
In my current experiment, I have two lists, namely "everything", and "committed". I arrange these on alternating pages. Since I only work on committed items, the committed pages show me the things I did, without the clutter of things I might do or things I added but dropped.
To your bigger question of setting goals, I'm not yet seeing a way to integrate that into a doing system, and I'm not sure it's needed. I'm presently reading through The Compound Effect and implementing the worksheets and charts it advises. There is some redundancy with the task list, but it's more thought-oriented and recording progress is very easy compared to running a task list.
September 4, 2012 at 22:46 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
@Alan Baljeu
>> What was visualized in your college system?
I believe my method was based on learning of the studies on athletes, where those that visualized making basketball shots did almost as well as those who did actual practice. perhaps this was part of Russian Olympic training?
so, after basic breath and relax techniques, I'd practice, see, feel in my mind, doing homework, how it would feel, how felt once done. I'd find there are sticky points. where I could NOT feel the homework getting done, or something would feel false. would continue to nibble around the edges of that feeling, until WAS able to feel strong positive emotions, experiences, of getting it done.
results were rapid, often immediate changes in a day.
we are always doing this, even if we do not know it. before trying to change how I felf, I'd walk around thinking/feeling to myself, how bad I was in getting homework done, lazy, what was wrong with me.
years later read of more complex NLP and even the lofty aims of creative visualization - where you are able to "make things happen" or "bring what you want to you". however, what I did back in college had the concrete studies of athletes, reasonable claims, simple to try and it delivered.
thanks for suggestion of The Compound Effect, I'll read that. found book in library recently with some similar ideas about small changes of 1 percent building to large changes, don't remember title.
>> What was visualized in your college system?
I believe my method was based on learning of the studies on athletes, where those that visualized making basketball shots did almost as well as those who did actual practice. perhaps this was part of Russian Olympic training?
so, after basic breath and relax techniques, I'd practice, see, feel in my mind, doing homework, how it would feel, how felt once done. I'd find there are sticky points. where I could NOT feel the homework getting done, or something would feel false. would continue to nibble around the edges of that feeling, until WAS able to feel strong positive emotions, experiences, of getting it done.
results were rapid, often immediate changes in a day.
we are always doing this, even if we do not know it. before trying to change how I felf, I'd walk around thinking/feeling to myself, how bad I was in getting homework done, lazy, what was wrong with me.
years later read of more complex NLP and even the lofty aims of creative visualization - where you are able to "make things happen" or "bring what you want to you". however, what I did back in college had the concrete studies of athletes, reasonable claims, simple to try and it delivered.
thanks for suggestion of The Compound Effect, I'll read that. found book in library recently with some similar ideas about small changes of 1 percent building to large changes, don't remember title.
September 6, 2012 at 1:05 |
matthewS
matthewS
Gerry wrote:
<< For me the simpler a system is the more pleasurable it is to use. Rules make things unpleasurable for me. >>
I'm feeling the same way. They also make it feel unnatural and anti-robust. Nicholas Taleb (Black Swan, Fooled By Randomness, etc.) made the great point that many extremely fine-tuned systems turn out to be anti-robust -- they completely break down whenever the environment changes. I see TM systems as helping me establish better habits and better focus, but not as being a way to turn my life into a fine-tuned productivity machine.
I don't want to be a fine-tuned productivity machine.
I do want to get things done -- LOTS of things -- I want to change the world, after all -- and live a balanced life with focus on my long-term values and relationships. Any TM rules or tools should be a help for that. But the more fine-tuned they get, the more I realize they will not have lasting value, they are actually anti-robust in the long term. It starts to feel like software feature-creep. I don't want a life filled with feature-creep, burdened with productivity tools. I want excellence and virtue and results that matter.
<< For me the simpler a system is the more pleasurable it is to use. Rules make things unpleasurable for me. >>
I'm feeling the same way. They also make it feel unnatural and anti-robust. Nicholas Taleb (Black Swan, Fooled By Randomness, etc.) made the great point that many extremely fine-tuned systems turn out to be anti-robust -- they completely break down whenever the environment changes. I see TM systems as helping me establish better habits and better focus, but not as being a way to turn my life into a fine-tuned productivity machine.
I don't want to be a fine-tuned productivity machine.
I do want to get things done -- LOTS of things -- I want to change the world, after all -- and live a balanced life with focus on my long-term values and relationships. Any TM rules or tools should be a help for that. But the more fine-tuned they get, the more I realize they will not have lasting value, they are actually anti-robust in the long term. It starts to feel like software feature-creep. I don't want a life filled with feature-creep, burdened with productivity tools. I want excellence and virtue and results that matter.
September 6, 2012 at 22:52 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Having tried (and eventually failed) with my own modified (okay, not modified; just not fully implemented) versions of How to get everything done, then DIT, the Autofocus, then (horror) GTD, then a DIT-GTD-Autofocus V4 amalgam, I was a little skeptical about FV because in the past I've failed the systems, rather than them failing me.
Most people's lives are complex these days, and mine is no exception. Some weeks ago I implemented - and committed to - a 'pure' version of FV (using Wunderlist) and it's working brilliantly thus far.
Last week saw critical "work work" done, and equally amazing (to me, at least) the 'new' house number got put on the wall, after mouldering in a drawer for three years and a lot of lost post.
That might seem a trivial example, but I think it's indicative of what I call the 'relentlessness' of the system. Eventually the 'first dot' was against the house number, and it got done. I use Mark's game of getting points for completing everything on the day's list, and in my case points make prizes - 5000 points this year = a nice pen. That's a challenging total.
Thanks Mark, and everyone else that contributes to this vibrant community.
Most people's lives are complex these days, and mine is no exception. Some weeks ago I implemented - and committed to - a 'pure' version of FV (using Wunderlist) and it's working brilliantly thus far.
Last week saw critical "work work" done, and equally amazing (to me, at least) the 'new' house number got put on the wall, after mouldering in a drawer for three years and a lot of lost post.
That might seem a trivial example, but I think it's indicative of what I call the 'relentlessness' of the system. Eventually the 'first dot' was against the house number, and it got done. I use Mark's game of getting points for completing everything on the day's list, and in my case points make prizes - 5000 points this year = a nice pen. That's a challenging total.
Thanks Mark, and everyone else that contributes to this vibrant community.
September 20, 2012 at 10:00 |
Tony Guntrip
Tony Guntrip
With that said, I also believe a system is like any tool; some want the process of using their tools to be pleasurable, and some don't care as long as the tool gets the job done.
When faced with limited time, choose any tool that will get the job done, and get it done. That way you're adaptable. But likewise, when you have the time to carefully select or design a tool for the job, do so.
This forum is not an exercise in procrastination if you want the right tool for the job that's also a pleasure to use, or if you are looking for an innovative new tool that may augment your current workflow — as long as you have the time to dedicate to this outcome and you know what a system can and can't do.
I think Chris is primarily worried for those that are jumping from tool to tool and endlessly adapting them because they find the system is not controlling *their behavior* properly — whether it's the doing of the tasks or the writing of too many. He seems to have walked that road and wishes to point others in a better direction.
All screwdrivers turn screws; the turning of the screw is up to you.
But some screwdrivers ease the effort needed to turn the screw, and some speed the process up or are just more pleasurable and comfortable to use.
There are people who are satisfied with a car that simply runs, does the essentials, and gets them to their destination; and there are those who take pleasure in driving a finely-tuned machine with good looks and tight-handling.
If the system you're using is not a pleasure to use, or you find your life has changed in a way that adds a new requirement for your system — and you know what a system can and can't do — then keep innovating, sharing, and discussing until you arrive at the solutions you're looking for. You may well help others in the process; much as Chris's message should help kick some into gear, taking action, and being adaptable.
Mark arrived at his solution to a balanced time-management system with his "Final Version", but if things have changed for him, or he's had new revelations and brilliant ideas — especially after all the concerns voiced here in the forum — he, and everyone else, should feel free to share.