Get Everything Done

A number of folks have attempted tweaks of FV that give it a bit more of a DIT feel -- e.g., extracting a today list.

A lot of us liked DIT because it gets incoming work under manageable control, and then slowly wittles away at the backlog until we're working like a clock. We also like that it tells us when we've been as productive as we want to be for the day.

I have found the FV to be very powerful and effective, and even though I liked DIT, I don't think the FV is missing anything essential to make it a very effective TM system. However, like most people here, I too am an experimentalist, sometimes, just for fun. I want to make it clear that I like FV very well as it is and don't necessary think it really needs to be improved, if done with a strong sense of "now" (see Mark's comment on the recent thread on "time available").

However, for the fans of FV/DIT tweaks here, let me suggest a simpler way that would be worth trying. The problem with most tweaks to Mark's systems is that they tend to destroy the system, which is based on a very delicate formula - accounting for pyschological readiness, urgency, etc. - that has had a lot of thought put into it. Before FV was released, Mark suggested some very simple tweaks to AF1 that a lot of people liked, and that didn't totally destroy the power of AF1. What if something similar could be done for FV for those who want more of a DIT feel in their FV? I thought of something that might be worth trying for those who can't resist the urge to experiment a bit. Try this:

Take your existing FV list. Instead of applying the algorithm starting at the top of the list, let's redefine the beginning and end of the list. Now, the first task entered yesterday (equivalent to the beginning of your today list from DIT) is the top of the list. The list begins there, goes down to the physical end of the list, wraps around to the physical top and on down until the last item entered the day before yesterday (if that day still exists).

Notice that it is absurdly simple and doesn't substantially alter FV -- All you have done is redefine the top and bottom of the list. Now apply the FV algorithm accordingly.

What does this accomplish?

1. The system pushes you to get done the tasks that you entered yesterday, like DIT.

2. The system takes care of urgent items efficiently.

3. The system slowly chips away at the backlog, as time permits.

What are the potential disadvantages?

1. There is less pressure on the backlog. One way to deal with this is to remember that you might have put "backlog" as your current initiative -- to be worked on at the beginning of the day -- when you were using DIT. Similarly, go ahead and make a regular FV list at the beginning of the day, and THEN switch to what I have proposed.

Anyone want to try it?

Good points. Thank you. One way of handling the issue you mentioned in your first post is to have a rule that your benchmark entry point only moves forward each day if you complete all the tasks on the yesterday list you were working on. This way the backlog is closed and only gets increased if you fall more than say 3 days behind, in which case you start from yesterday again and declare a bigger backlog. At this point you are basically just doing DIT on one master list, using the FV algorithm and adding more "little and often". You could almost call it a notebook implementation of DIT, akin to DWM2.

"This sometimes helps me get going on a DIT list that feels a little overwhelming. But in fact, it's usually easier just to bang through the list from top to bottom in order, skipping only the items I can't physically do at the moment."

But that's basically what FV is -- first in, first out, with provision for exceptions due to urgency or simply to account for psychological readiness. If you haven't already, check out Mark's comment on my recent thread on "available discretionary time". Approaching FV with this in mind has resulted in FV purring like a kitten for me.

My last sentence applies only to the original instructions as issued by Mark. I haven't tried my own tweak yet because FV is already working quite well for me. But for those who feel that they need the "time equation" that is present in DIT and DWM, I thought this would be interesting to try, and if anyone does try it, I'd be interested in hearing how it works out.

Thanks, Nicole. I appreciate that you are trying it and your feedback. What made me think of this was that I wanted FV to put more pressure on the tasks added yesterday. I found that my "want" muscle was weak, and I sometimes ended up letting the algorithm put too much pressure on old tasks that can wait and not enough pressure on incoming tasks. The tweak does solve this, but at the cost of possibly losing FV's remarkable tendency to shrink the list. I wish I could think of a simple way to avoid this, but everything that has come to mind so far is overcomplicated. Maybe I just need to strengthen my "choice muscle" as Mark called it and stick to standard FV. It is certainly working quite well for me overall. I would love to find a simple way, though, to benchmark the yesterday tasks without letting the backlog grow out of control.

This is a simple solution that I think has potential:

1. Standard FV list-building.

2. Benchmarking starts at the first task added yesterday and proceeds downward. The list jumps to the very top when you reach the bottom and proceeds down until the benchmark point.

2. AF2-style dismissal

(No, inability to count to three is not part of the system).