Get Everything Done

I have been commenting in Mark Forster's January 6, 2018 blog post about how FFVP for me has evolved to being purely intuitive by casting aside altogether the use of questions. Once I come to a dotted task, either freshly "stood out" or dotted previously, I take a glance at it and listen to the feeling my intuition was sending me.

• A feeling towards "attraction", "approval", or "indifference" means I am ready to do it: I stop scanning down and do the dotted task.
• A feeling towards "ambivalence" or "uncertainty" means I am not ready to do it: I keep on scanning down.
• A feeling towards "revulsion," "finality," or "confusion" means I do not want to do it: I delete the dotted task and (if needed) rewrite at the end, then go to the previous dotted task and repeat.

It may sound complicated, but all of this feels organic and fluid to me, and it is faster than the double-questioning of the original FVP. Not only that, but it solved for me the problems of keeping both the list and the dotted task chains relevant which kept me from using FV and FVP before.

However, I hadn't realized I have not used this "intuitive glance" to the fullest until I encountered ProductivityLover's question in the same blog post. He noted the problem with Mark Forster's systems in that "little and often" can be used excessively to the detriment of productivity, to which even Mark acknowledged. I had a wild idea on how to correct this: the next time I used FFVP, after doing what I can on the written tasks, before crossing them out of my list, I took "intuitive glances" at them.

As expected, most of the "intuitive glances" returned to me as "revulsion" or "finality." But to my surprise, what I got for some were "approval" and "attraction": I still wanted to do more out of those tasks. But since I have done what seems to be what can be done for those tasks, I had to ask my intuition what else should I be doing for them.

What resulted from this experiment was an explosion of intuitive work for me, of working "in the flow" for hours. I honestly cannot believe how much I was able to do in the hours I was doing that, nor the focus I had in those same hours. And tentative codifying of all of this into a system for pen and notebook resulted in something that, for me, combines the best of long and short lists, and resembles Seraphim's Current Initiatives FVP and Theory of Constraints FVP but with much less preselection.

Let me try to iron out the kinks in the instructions then I'll post them, but all of this looks very promising to me!

MIFFVP seems to be fully developed now to the point that I am confident enough to post the instructions for it.

The whole system revolves around replacing the two intuitive questions of FVP ("Ready?" and "More?") into a fully questionless intuitive process of choosing tasks.

The process has two levels. The first level is the standard "Standing Out" as described by Mark Forster: you scan down the list and dot whatever task "stands out" of the others. The second level is the "Intuitive Glance" where you briefly look at the dotted task and listen to what you feel about the task to decide the next action. As explained above, the Intuitive Glance can yield

• A feeling towards "attraction", "approval", or "indifference" means I am ready to do it: I stop scanning down and do the dotted task. Let us call this "YES."
• A feeling towards "ambivalence" or "uncertainty" means I am not ready to do it: I keep on scanning down. Let us call this "YES BUT."
• A feeling towards "revulsion," "finality," or "confusion" means I do not want to do it: I delete the dotted task and (if needed) rewrite at the end, then go to the previous dotted task and repeat. Let us call this "NO."

One way to understand this process is to say that "Standing Out" tells me which tasks to dot, and "Intuitive Glance" tells me why the tasks were dotted.



I. Using the dual process in dotting tasks.
1. Dot the first task on the list, then use "Intuitive Glance" on it.
a. A feeling of "YES" means you start working on it.
b. A feeling of "NO" means it is not relevant anymore: delete it and if needed reword and rewrite at the end. Dot the next task and repeat.
c. A feeling of "YES BUT" means you scan down until another task "Stands Out."

2. Everytime a task "Stands Out" you always dot it then use "Intuitive Glance" on it.
a. A feeling of "YES" means you start working on it.
b. A feeling of "NO" means it is not relevant anymore: delete it and if needed reword and rewrite at the end. Keep on scanning down the list.
c. A feeling of "YES BUT" means you scan down until another task "Stands Out."

3. As in the original FFVP:
a. Whenever you reach the end of the list you must work on the last dotted task on the list.
b. Whenever you delete the first task on the list the new first task must be dotted.



II. Advanced Intuitive Process: Using "Intuitive Glance" on the Task Last Done
1. Once you are done with your task, before you cross it out, use "Intuitive Glance" on it.
a. A feeling of "YES BUT" means it is done for now but it is not fully complete: after crossing it out, you can rewrite it on the end of the list; expect to work on it again soon.
b. A feeling of "NO" means it is truly done: you can cross it out and if needed you can rewrite it at the end of the list. If so, expect to not work on it again for a while.
c. A feeling of "YES" means you are not done with it. Consciously, you may not see how it is not finished yet, but your intuition knows.

2. If "Intuitive Glance" gives "YES" on your last task, then encircle the dot of that task to make a fisheye ◉ and go to the end of the list.

3. Ask your intuition "What else should I be doing?" then list all the tasks that comes up preceded by a plus sign +. Do not worry if the tasks seem not related to the fisheyed ◉ task or if they are already listed in your FVP list; just trust your intuition.

4. You can work on those plus + tasks in any order you wish, and you can keep on adding plus + tasks, but you have to do all of these + tasks before you can go back to your dotted tasks and main list. Also you can write tasks for your main list anytime: since such tasks are unmarked, they should not confuse you.

5. Once all plus + tasks are done, go back to your fisheyed ◉ task and use "Intuitive Glance" on it. A feeling of "NO" or "YES BUT" means you are safe to cross it out; go to Part III below. However, a feeling of "YES" means you are still not done with it so go back to step 3 above.

6. You can also use "Intuitive Glance" on the plus + tasks, in which case you encircle the "YES" plus task to make a ⨁ and use ++ or ‡ for the additional tasks. This is rare, though it has happened to me once.



III. Using the dual process in keeping the dotted task chain relevant
Once you are done with the last task, rewrite if needed at the end of the list the task, then cross out the task. Go back to the last dotted task and use "Intuitive Glance" on it.
a. A feeling of "YES" means you start working on it.
b. A feeling of "NO" means it is not relevant anymore: delete it and if needed reword and rewrite at the end. Go to the previous dotted task and use "Intuitive Glance" on it. Re-use the algorithm in this step.
c. A feeling of "YES BUT" means you scan down from the last deleted task until another task "Stands Out."

@Alan Baljeu and Seraphim:

I do not blame you for feeling that the system is complicated. It involves developing and trusting your intuition to a greater degree than one would be used to in using Mark Forster's systems, so yes that is one major disadvantage of MIFFVP.

I did not lightly use the term "Maximally Intuitive" in naming the system.

Therefore, if anybody wants to try this system, I'd think it has to be in organic (i.e. not forced) steps, and I predict it will go the same path that I went through:

Do Part I of the steps for a few days. You will then feel your intuition get more developed and you will trust it more. You might feel then the urge to start using the same selection process to keep your dotted tasks relevant, so you will start using Part III almost without realizing it. Part II is the trickiest and most probably the last one to happen, since you have to totally let go of what you consciously think about your tasks and let your intuition say when you really are finished with them, but once you get to that, get ready to be constantly in "the flow" of work.

However, Seraphim, I can wager you actually are ready to start using MIFFVP and actually see how, ahem, "intuitive" the system is. You see, I used your exact words in describing the three possibilities of "Intuitive Glance":

http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2018/1/6/change-to-fast-fvp.html#item21817965

You actually are describing Part I of the steps in that post!

Now, if you listen the same way to the already dotted tasks to keep them relevant, then you are doing Part III. Then if you just try listening to the tasks you just have done, I think you will be surprised with the results.

@Alan Baljeu:

<<But once you get into all the various ways of marking things it starts to feel complicated. >>

Honestly I cannot see the complications, but it could be because I have been using "Intuitive Glance" for almost three weeks before I start using Part II of the steps.

Also, other systems in here (including quite a few of my own) have multiple symbols interspersed with each other in the main list. With MIFFVP you only have dots • above the encircled dotted ◉ task, and pluses + below . Not only that but only the plus'd tasks matter when they are out; nothing else can be worked on until all plus'd tasks are gone and the encircled dotted task is considered done.

@Mark Forster: <<It's FFVP but with an additional rule that you can leave a task you have been working on in place while you construct a new chain.>>

To be honest I cannot call the additional tasks an FVP type chain when I can do them in any order that I choose.

<<What I'm not so sure about is what the point of doing that is - as opposed to re-entering the task at the end of the list.>>

If we are going to do it like that, then It would be:
1. Delete and re-write the task at the end of the list, dot it immediately but do not work on it right away.
2. Write additional tasks.
3. Dot whichever of those additional tasks stand out per FFVP instructions.

I guess that can work and I can try that.

However the point of doing all of what I proposed is getting out of the constraints of FFVP. Sometimes you really need the freedom to list some additional tasks that you can do right now helps in doing a main task, or that you want to fully control what tasks you can do while waiting for another task to become relevant again, or even to be surprised when you realize you are not fully finished with your work and there actually things you can do right now that can improve it.

In other words, the main point of what I am proposing is the option to have a "no list" inside your "long list", especially when you are in "the flow" of your work.

<<I also can't see what's more intuitive about YES, NO, and YES BUT. It's just what happens naturally during FFVP scanning. No need to make it more complicated.>>

Part I is exactly how FFVP is if you do not use questions. It is the application of the same process in keeping my dotted tasks relevant (which already has been touched in the latest and previous instructions of FFVP) and in the tasks I have just done to launch to even more insight in my own work that is amazing.

It is not that I want FFVP to be more complicated, it is that it is amazing how much I can further use it.

@Mark Forster: <<FFVP has very little in the way of constraints.>>

Nevertheless, they are there.

<<That's not even a problem in FVP. Even less so in FFVP. >>

Maybe, but then that's only a small part of what I wanted.

<<That's a pretty good description of how FFVP works. >>

I doubt that Mark, since when I tried to do what I was doing with MIFFVP just using FFVP rules. It was....convoluted. Sure it can be done, but the rules of FFVP and the rest of the main list just were getting in the way. Of course It could be because I was used to using my method.

@Seraphim: <<"dynamic list">>

Thank you! That was the term I should have used at the beginning: MIFFVP, among other things, lets me use dynamic lists inside the list.

@Mark Forster: <<Which ones in particular get in your way?>>

That it is a long list with other stuff in there. There are times that I want to focus on a particular task, and MIFFVP's Part II lets me do that by allowing dynamic lists (thanks again for reminding me of that term, Seraphim!) to be done inside the list.

And before anybody says anything, yes dynamic lists can be done other ways like "stalactite/stalagmite" or just using a separate sheet of paper, but I like how Part II lets me use my own main list to do this nor does it break the flow of the list.

<<Bear in mind that you are allowed to re-prioritize a task in FFVP (and for that matter FVP) by crossing it out and re-entering it at the end of the list.>>

"It is the application of the same process in keeping my dotted tasks relevant (which already has been touched in the latest and previous instructions of FFVP)..."

<<Well yes, but I think the convolution came from the MI, not the FFVP.>>

You mean the convolution comes from the freedom I feel from MI and then going back to the limitations of FFVP? I agree.

<<In fact I frequently break my own rules when there's a good reason to. But the important point is that the rules are the standard and I only deviate from them when there is a good reason. Otherwise one might just as well not use any system at all (and, yes, I have tried that too!) >>

Or make it so that those deviations are not needed to be done anymore.

@Laby: Yes it still does work for me, really well in fact!