ProductivityCast
ProductivityCast

ProductivityCast

Ray Sidney-Smith

Overview
Episodes

Details

The weekly show about all things personal productivity

Recent Episodes

How to Conduct a Mid-Year Review
JUL 24, 2023
How to Conduct a Mid-Year Review
<p>Today on <em>ProductivityCast </em>we’re going to be talking about stepping away from getting things done so you can review and reflect, and then get back to getting things done better. It’s halfway through the year and so it’s a good time to discuss the mid-year review. A mid-year review is a practice like any other reflection activity, where we take the time to look over our progress, reevaluate our goals, and recalibrate our personal productivity systems. It&#8217;s a moment to pause, step back, and gain clarity on where we stand in relation to our aspirations and how we can make the most of the second half of the year.</p> <p>Correction: Ray said &#8220;weekly review&#8221; at the start of the episode when he actually meant &#8220;mid-year review.&#8221; </p> <p>(If you’re reading this in a podcast directory/app, please visit <a href="https://productivitycast.net/141">https://productivitycast.net/141</a> for clickable links and the full show notes and transcript of this cast.)</p> <p>Enjoy! <a href="http://productivitycast.net/contact/">Give us feedback</a>! And, thanks for listening!</p> <p>If you&#8217;d like to continue discussing <strong>How to Conduct a Mid-Year Review</strong> from this episode, please <a href="#reply-title">click here to leave a comment</a> down below (this jumps you to the bottom of the post).</p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">In this Cast | How to Conduct a Mid-Year Review</h2> <p><a href="http://productivitycast.net/about/">Ray Sidney-Smith</a></p> <p><a href="http://productivitycast.net/about/">Augusto Pinaud</a></p> <p><a href="http://productivitycast.net/about/">Art Gelwicks</a></p> <p><a href="https://productivitycast.net/about/">Francis Wade</a></p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">Show Notes | How to Conduct a Mid-Year Review</h2> <p><em>Resources we mention, including links to them, will be provided here. Please listen to the episode for context.</em></p> <p><a href="https://extension.umn.edu/two-you-video-series/ras">Reticular activating system (RAS)</a></p> <figure class="wp-block-embed is-type-video is-provider-youtube wp-block-embed-youtube wp-embed-aspect-16-9 wp-has-aspect-ratio"><div class="wp-block-embed__wrapper"> <iframe title="The biggest myths about emotions, debunked | Lisa Feldman Barrett" width="810" height="456" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0QfCvIJRtE0?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe> </div></figure> <p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QfCvIJRtE0">The biggest myths about emotions, debunked | Lisa Feldman Barrett</a></p> <p><a href="https://fs.blog/antifragile-a-definition/">Antifragility</a></p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">Raw Text Transcript</h2> <p><em>Raw, unedited and machine-produced text transcript so there may be substantial errors, but you can search for specific points in the episode to jump to, or to reference back to at a later date and time, by keywords or key phrases. The time coding is mm:ss (e.g., 0:04 starts at 4 seconds into the cast’s audio).</em></p> <span><a onclick="read_toggle(1608400141, '', ''); return false;" class="read-link" id="readlink1608400141" style="readlink" href="#"></a></span> <div class="read_div" id="read1608400141" style="display: none;"></p> <p>Voiceover Artist 0:00 <br> Are you ready to manage your work and personal world better to live a fulfilling productive life, then you&#8217;ve come to the right place productivity cast, the weekly show about all things productivity. Here, your host Ray Sidney-Smith and Augusto Pinaud with Francis Wade and Art Gelwicks.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 0:18<br> And Welcome back, everybody to productivity cast, the weekly show about all things personal productivity, I&#8217;m Ray Sidney Smith.</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 0:22<br> I am Augusto Pinaud.</p> <p>Francis Wade 0:24<br>I&#8217;m Francis Wade.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 0:26<br> And I&#8217;m Art Gelwicks.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 0:26<br>Welcome, gentlemen, and welcome to our listeners to this episode of productivity cast. Today, on ProductivityCast, we&#8217;re going to be talking about stepping away from getting things done for a bit, so we can review and reflect. And what I mean by that is that we&#8217;re halfway through the year. And this is a really good time for us to discuss the mid year review. A mid year review is a practice like any other reflection activity, where we take time to look over our progress, reevaluate our goals, and really recalibrate our personal productivity systems. It&#8217;s a moment to pause the back and gain clarity, gain perspective on where we stand in relationship to our aspirations, and how we can make the most of the second half of our calendar year. So let&#8217;s talk today about what the [mid-year] review is to each of us on because it may be different. We&#8217;ll then talk a little bit about why why someone should do a mid year review. And perhaps why not, I mean, there may be some folks who don&#8217;t do it, and therefore giving some perspective there. And then we&#8217;ll talk about some of the elements of our own media reviews. And perhaps how you can get started developing your own video review. If you haven&#8217;t done one before, we&#8217;re just kicking the tires, and making your mid year review better. So let&#8217;s talk first about what is a mid year review. I kind of gave a definition in our preamble. But if you want to give some further color to it, what do you think the video review is to you?</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 1:53<br>Okay, we all have, you know, our reticular system activated by the means is our brain is like a scanner. And he&#8217;s paying attention to what we what we do what we are down, we want to know what direction we&#8217;re taking. If you don&#8217;t set that scanner in any direction, well, it doesn&#8217;t matter, it will scan something, but is that Samsung? What do you want. One of the things that I believe is important is to track that word did you want to go on it is still something that is valid that is interesting is there is nothing wrong in to change the direction. What is wrong is to in my perspective, is to walk aimlessly and just moving and seeing what is happening. So I have been personally on truck and off truck for both. And in my experience on truck is way more fun. So that&#8217;s part of the reason why I conduct this MC gear reviews and why I work with my clients, the clients that I have coached in to do this review and why I believe is very, very important. It is very simple to lose track. But it&#8217;s also easy to get back on it.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 3:14<br>As a sidestep just to clarify for some folks, what Lisa was talking about was the reticular activating system. And so this is a neural network in in our brain, right we have a neural network. And the RAS is responsible for a wide variety of things. And some of those things, of course, are our ability to identify patterns of things. It also regulates our wakefulness, it regulates our ability to basically have a consciousness, motivation, all kinds of other things. It&#8217;s also the thing that identifies our fight or flight response or flight flight freeze response. And it&#8217;s really how we perceive the world. So a lot of that RAS is activated, those network of neurons are really activated when we&#8217;re trying to identify patterns of things. So you know, when we see something that shaped like a lion, moving toward us, whether it&#8217;s a lion or not, our RAS kicks in, and we start to respond from a biological perspective, right, we prepare for fight or flight, because of our mind, surfacing those stimuli, we get activated for preparation for whatever that thing is. So just want to make sure folks are kind of on the same page when when we talk about the RAS,</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 4:22<br>the mid year review, in my estimation is one of those things that becomes a necessary evil for many people because that they get so involved in the work and doing the work, that they haven&#8217;t got a running time period, they may not even do weekly reviews of going through and determining where they stand and where things are. I also think it&#8217;s a bigger review though. It&#8217;s the it&#8217;s the review that determines Are you on course, it&#8217;s not for minor course adjustments, but is your destination the correct destination. So for me, it&#8217;s always a matter of not only of determining Are you making progress on the goals that you&#8217;ve set Get out. But it&#8217;s an opportunity to say, okay, based on where the world stands right now, where my world stands right now, are those the right goals? Are those the opportunities that I want to be pursuing are those the objectives that I need to have at this point in time. That&#8217;s not something you want to do on a weekly basis, because you&#8217;ll never get out of the analysis mode. But this is very much in my mind, the opportunity to do a strategic analysis of what your goals and objectives are.</p> <p>Francis Wade 5:30<br>And I&#8217;d be the contrarian here, or the devil&#8217;s advocate. For a change,</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 5:36<br>surprise, surprise,</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 5:39<br>that&#8217;s my job.</p> <p>Francis Wade 5:40<br>I&#8217;m taking art putting on our chat for a while, I don&#8217;t do a video review. And I know that the logical that I should do one. But here&#8217;s why. I have three kinds of interests in the in our business. And we cover three web three conferences per year, one in productivity, the other one in strategy and another one in Caribbean HR. And they they go from March, March, June, and September. And we have our strategic plan for each one. And we gotten into the practice of updating the strategic plan after each conference. So we&#8217;re, we don&#8217;t quite review them because they don&#8217;t follow the calendar. But we do three rounds of strategic planning each year, to focus on each business. Invariably, for example, the strategic planning conference is coming up this week, probably next week, or the week after, we&#8217;ll do a review, or we&#8217;ll do a new plan for the next year. But we&#8217;ll also review the other plans. So we don&#8217;t really have a media review. receipts, not a not, not the way that you traditionally think of it, we we do forward planning for each each of the three businesses, so to speak, or interests. And in that we tend to cover the wall cannibal overlook, look over the wall, all three are doing. So not really. But in a way, I guess something similar gets done. This doesn&#8217;t follow the calendar, that&#8217;s for sure,</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 7:21<br>I&#8217;ll offer a different perspective here, which is not counter to what Francis is talking about. But more from, from my perspective, I am a natural planner. So I could plan all the time, all the all the ways and do nothing, right? That would be my natural state of being. And I recognize that very early on in my life. And I realized that I just love planning, I love the idea of pulling out a Gantt chart, I love sitting down with a mind map and just planning all day long. And that&#8217;s not how things get done, right. So you have to step away from that planning activity or, or, if you&#8217;re like me, you have to step away from that to be able to get things done. But that also means that you need to reward yourself for doing the things. And for me having these reviews, both the weekly review and larger reviews gives me the opportunity to it&#8217;s kind of a reward for doing the work, because my natural desire is to actually just do the planning, right, I want to do the planning, and I want to hand it off to somebody else to be like, You go handle those details, right. But because I&#8217;ve done the work, now I get to sit back and actually do the planning. And that&#8217;s my reward. So the mid year review specifically, is typically if I&#8217;m having a good year, and things are going the way they should be. And then the media review is is really this rewarding space. For me. It&#8217;s a place where I can enjoy the fruits of what I&#8217;ve worked on. And so often, those of you who are listening, don&#8217;t give yourself enough credit for the work that you&#8217;re doing. And we need to step back and just give ourselves a little bit of credit for what we&#8217;re doing. And I feel like the midterm review is one of those things like throw yourself a little party and have a great time with it because you&#8217;ve worked hard for six months. And I know you&#8217;re working hard. And if you aren&#8217;t working hard, this is a really good opportunity to kind of set yourself up for the next six months to work really hard so that you when you get to the next mid year review or the end of your review so to speak, you can you can celebrate, right this gives you that anchor in the sand to be able to to know that you&#8217;ve had a chunk of time, whether you&#8217;re following the 12 week year and you&#8217;re going based on those kinds of sprints, or you&#8217;re doing some larger sprints like I am I do I do pretty much the the 12 week 13 week year kind of concept. I call them sprints and I like those kinds of reviews where I&#8217;m I have that timeframe set aside to basically pause, reflect, appreciate the work that I&#8217;ve done and planned for the future. The mid year review is that next level of of celebration in a way it&#8217;s a milestone for me and my year and it really does help me as a plant Enter, sit back and feel good in some way, shape or form, it&#8217;s actually a, it&#8217;s a, it&#8217;s a rewarding practice for me. And it may be for you as well. Let&#8217;s talk about why different than Francis, where you have a cadence, where you&#8217;re where your year is structured in such a way that allows you to plan along the way, why should someone do a mid year review? Why should someone not do a mid year review. And I will start off with the with the primary type of person who probably doesn&#8217;t need a mid year review. And those are folks who have highly structured calendar years. And so this ends up being something where you have a structured set of reviews that are that are forced upon you. And therefore adding another personal review may be just a little bit too much. If you are doing quarterly reviews. And in essence, your mid year review falls on obviously a quarter, you&#8217;re just basically doing double the work. So if you feel comfortable with the fact that your quarterly review is basically standing in for your mid year review, then you don&#8217;t need to do a separate mid year review from the quarterly review, necessarily, right. And that&#8217;s going to differ per person. So you know, your results may vary here, but I just don&#8217;t think that I have clients who will come and say, Okay, well, I&#8217;ve done my Quarterly Review, now I&#8217;m going to do my video review. And I feel like this should be one in the same, I don&#8217;t feel like you should try to force yourself to do just a quarter and then also a mid year at the same time. That is you can do them at the same time, you can just bring those together. For folks where this may be overwhelming that you&#8217;re looking at too much material at once. This can, this can be something that&#8217;s just very overwhelming to the system. And therefore you would avoid it and therefore not do as well a review that may be a problem for some folks. So you may want to break that review up into into separate constituent parts by life domain, so that it&#8217;s not as onerous for you as as as it as it can be.</p> <p>Francis Wade 12:02<br>But for the ones that I do, it&#8217;s it&#8217;s, well, as I said, don&#8217;t quite do them. But But whenever I sit down to do a, I wouldn&#8217;t call it a review. And I think this is one of the things that I I recommend to people when they when that comes out of there come from GTD and come from the world of doing a weekly review and have that as their background. There is no planning step in the weekly review, which is to me is a huge, huge missing. The point of sitting down is not just to look back, it&#8217;s to look forward. So a big part of the review, so to speak, is to readjust, make new plans, set new targets, incorporate lessons learned into what you&#8217;re doing going forward. And to me that&#8217;s the point is what&#8217;s coming next The point is not what just happened. The main point is what&#8217;s coming next. So the orientation really is towards what do I need to fix, change, adjust. Add in takeouts where my were my goals are unrealistic. Where do they need to be? Or where were they not ambitious enough where they need to scale up? So it&#8217;s a it&#8217;s a phase change, you&#8217;re looking to see do I do I make a phase change at this point, based on my understanding of where I am, versus where I thought I wanted to be or where I wanted to be. So for me, it&#8217;s looking forward, that&#8217;s a huge part of the activity. And for me,</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 13:36<br>situations change. And a lot of times the change is not under your control. It&#8217;s an external influence that has come into the equation. And the major media review is the opportunity to look at those changes that affect multiple parts of whatever you&#8217;re doing. A lot of times we&#8217;ll be looking at, okay, how does this affect this project? How does this affect that project? But it could be how does this affect me as a whole? How does this affect my availability? My my approach to my work? Could it be that significant of a change. And when you&#8217;re dealing with things at that altitude, it&#8217;s sometimes it&#8217;s difficult to look at them, or to not look at them at the individual project level, because then you start to solve the problem right away. I think mid year review is one of those opportunities to not solve problems, but identify problems to to recognize, as you mentioned earlier, recognize the successful things that you&#8217;ve done and say can I do them again? Can I reproduce this or improve my other operations? But even more so to be able to go through and say, Okay, this is a potential issue. Maybe this is an issue that is coming, rather than has already been here. And now it&#8217;s starting to show up on the horizon. If you wait to a yearly review, to address those kinds of things. That&#8217;s often too late. You have not given yourself the opportunity to do Gaston, I always have this mental image of the captain of the Titanic. The equivalency of that yearly review would be seeing the iceberg and actually being able to avoid it. So knowing that you have an opportunity to say, oh, there&#8217;s an iceberg, maybe we should change direction, rather than waiting until it&#8217;s too late. And sometimes there aren&#8217;t. And you go through and you have that validation to say, yep, everything&#8217;s on course. Everything&#8217;s headed the direction it should be. I&#8217;m making the progress I should be, all&#8217;s right with the world and continue on. But this is this is that checkpoint? And I don&#8217;t think we do ourselves a favor, by not having, at a minimum this mid year. But having frequent checkpoints to say, okay, am I on target, get your head out of the work and look around and make sure you&#8217;re driving in the right direction.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 15:57<br>One thing that I think comes up as a thought, from what you&#8217;re talking about art is the importance of making decisions from a place of call it abundance from a place of calm and collected temperament. The reality is, is that when you come across a problem, like what you&#8217;re talking about, right, like something&#8217;s off course, there&#8217;s an iceberg, and you&#8217;re, you know, you&#8217;re very close to it. Maybe you know, the impact is imminent, setting aside some, like safe space for yourself, to think that through like, in the right circumstance, where there wasn&#8217;t this problem, how would I respond? If I had all the resources in the world? How would I respond, and then kind of working toward reality, as opposed to being in that? Oh, my gosh, I&#8217;ve got the last dollar in the bank, what do I do now? Right? The, that&#8217;s not the best place to make decisions from, right. And it kind of goes back to my, whenever I have a new business that I&#8217;m dealing with, I always educate the small business owner, that they should get a home equity line, they should get a credit line with their bank, they should do all of the stuff for getting good credit available, when they don&#8217;t need it, right? Because that&#8217;s when your credit score is going to be your best. It&#8217;s when the business doesn&#8217;t have any debt. It&#8217;s when the business is got the mess, most energy, right, you&#8217;re an entrepreneur, you&#8217;re starting your business, you&#8217;re excited, everybody is excited about the business, then you set that line of credit aside, right, and you have it for a rainy day. Right. That&#8217;s why you you do this stuff up front. And that&#8217;s the kind of expansive abundance position that you want to be in when you&#8217;re doing your mid year review. And I feel like that&#8217;s the kind of space and place where you want to make good decisions so that when stuff hits the fan, you&#8217;re able to step back and say, You know what, I had a plan in place. Right? And this is that was the ideal, right? Now, let&#8217;s work from that ideal to what is reality. But we&#8217;re making better decisions, because we&#8217;re not looking at it purely from crisis mode. And the bottom of the barrel, right? We&#8217;re looking at it from some some better perspective, some some better positioning,</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 18:02<br>really was was was what you said, I think that&#8217;s what it needs. If you think right now, okay, we&#8217;re going to be driving from the south to the north of your country, doesn&#8217;t matter. What is your country? Okay? Unless you will have done that drive every week. Do you need a map? Do you need to check? Hey, are we really interactive? We missed the exit. And it&#8217;s exactly the same thing you asked. Francis was saying, okay, hey, we drive this in this order. So we always drive in this order that may require a different Chuck, but I instead maybe have been every six months, probably what happened on what was Francis was describing is that at the end of every of this conference comes an evaluation period, what we did, right, why we did wrong, what we need to change or evolve for the next one, and what we can add for the next one. So it&#8217;s not that he&#8217;s not doing the review is doing a review in a different way. In this case, in the case of the people who should do this review, as you were saying, Ray, you do it every 12 week for 12 weeks, that works perfectly fine. Okay, that you go every quarter. That&#8217;s what 13 weeks is, in case you&#8217;re not aware of that is every 13 weeks, it&#8217;s a quarter that works fine. If you think on corporations, many corporations go and do that quarterly review where we are. What we tend not to do is to do it in our personal life. And because of that, sometimes we make big things that change. So my kids, I have two little kids still so they just finished school. And well. Can we go business usual? Technically yes. Except that my daughter is now going to high school. My son, it&#8217;s going now to fifth grade. That Technically for us is the same. But for him, it&#8217;s not now he&#8217;s going to be treated as a bigger kid. He&#8217;s going to get a Chromebook that he needs to be responsible. He and ultimately, I will be responsible. Let&#8217;s be honest. So that means great. Is his backpack. Okay to carry a Chromebook? And the answer is no by well, because his backpack to keep backpack? So do we need to consider those things or as hardware sitting or wait until that iceberg hit us again, and we need to use the insurance write a check for the new Chromebook, whatever it is, either way, is fine. I, I always said you don&#8217;t do productivity for the press and you. You do productivity for the future. You you do all these reviews, not for the new right now that you&#8217;re in right now is where it is. You are doing these six months review? What are the review? For that future self? What can you do today, evaluate today, and review today that will make the life of that future do better, or easier, or more complete. And data for me is the recent of these reviews, doesn&#8217;t matter if you do them mid year, or you do them every quarter, this thing is you need at some point to disconnect. Okay, go to somewhere that is not your office and look into all these aspects forward. Because if you don&#8217;t, then you&#8217;re always on reactive mode, you&#8217;re always responding to fire, you&#8217;re always responding to the emergencies instead of work into avoiding them to happen. And that, for me is a big power of all these things.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 22:02<br>Over the weekend, I had the opportunity to sit down and watch a few YouTube videos that were in my watch later list. And it&#8217;s voluminous, I don&#8217;t consider it an injury, I just collect them in there and watch the whenever I have time. And one of the things that I came across was this interesting video, and I&#8217;ll put it I&#8217;ll put this in the show notes. If I if I find it. The idea was it was talking about emotions and some of the myths about emotions. And one of the key elements that came out of this particular psychologists perspective was that a we curate the present moment, for our ability to have future emotions that resonate with us in a positive way, I may be mischaracterizing her in just a little bit. But the essence of what I got from it was that, you know, our, our history, or maybe childhood trauma, our childhood experiences, our the relations that we had, as as children, those inform our current and present day emotional landscape. And we can change that by virtue of the by the present moment for our future self. And so we have to consistently think about how we keep well how we curate the present moment, how we curate our present emotional life, so that our future emotional life is better, we would hope and what Augusto is talking about here really touches on that that point a lot, which is that we are benefiting our future self by by basically taking this time now to birth this, this future reality, right, we don&#8217;t have very much control over the future. We have control maybe over the next few minutes of our lives. And we what we do in the next few minutes determines what happens in the next few hours. And the next few days, the next few months, and the next few years. So what can we do right now to curate a good life. Right, the good life so to speak, in and for the future. And I think I think that really is an important note here to make when we think about something like a media review. Alright, let&#8217;s talk about how we might manifest our media reviews or how what elements of our own media reviews are really key or core components of it.</p> <p>Francis Wade 24:09<br>I want my media reviews to be like a my weekly cup of coffee. My my most productive Fun Day is at my desk. Our Saturdays when I have my weepy cup. And as a non coffee drinker and apparently I&#8217;m and I&#8217;m sensitive to coffee eight. By virtue of that, we want to have that cup. I can work until about 8:30pm 9pm and not feel a thing. You know, I could I could just go go go might take a little nap during the day but I you know, it&#8217;s a long day, but it doesn&#8217;t feel like feels great. As someone who likes to accomplish a whole lot. I like the feeling of getting a lot accomplished because I&#8217;m focused. I don&#8217;t have interruptions. The copy goes whatever it does, and I feel good all day. I write up the teleport where I hit the hit the sack, I&#8217;m feeling like, wow, that was a great day, I would want my weekly review to be like that. It&#8217;s not, it&#8217;s not the word review kind of puts me to sleep a little bit. For me, it will be more of an acceleration, my semi annual review. But my my review had wanted to be like a, like a cup of coffee in the sense that it accelerates the rest of the year. So I&#8217;m not doing it for the review, I&#8217;m doing it for the acceleration, the Jumpstart. So I would, I would, if I were to do one on a regular basis, I would rename it the the acceleration meeting or the the propeller meeting or something that would give me you know, indicate that really what I&#8217;m looking for is what Augustus talked about, which is, I&#8217;m looking to bring something into the future that if I don&#8217;t have this meeting that I couldn&#8217;t bring, so part of that includes the review, but the review is not the point. Hence, my wanting to rename it to something more, more, more accurate or more compelling in terms of the actual outcome, because you could really, you know, you could very well review the the last six months and come away with nothing except either a feeling of accomplishment, a feeling of failure, you could just stop in a review and stop if you thought that was the point. But I prefer to think of the point as this next level of accomplishment, this is exciting, something that&#8217;s about to start. And the six month, six months review is kind of like the what is kind of like the point where this second start, second half of the year starts. And where I bring all this new stuff into it.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 26:46<br>I think terminology for purposes of it being both motivating and exciting is important. I think that you know if you need to call it the. So I&#8217;ve I have a dear friend who she didn&#8217;t like the term weekly review. And so she just calls it the weekly view. Right. And so she she wants to look ahead, and so she calls it the weekly view, I think I think that makes a lot of sense. And so if you want to call this your mid year planning session, you know, mid year acceleration session, whatever you want to call it, I think that makes a lot of sense to make it what you want. Now, of course, I consider any review something that is looking at the past in order to inform my future, I embrace the term review. That doesn&#8217;t mean that you do and that&#8217;s okay. So I very much hear what Francis is talking about, name it, whatever you need to name it, in order for you to know that it&#8217;s the right thing for you.</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 27:34<br>What is important is that it&#8217;s done, not what you call it, I agree,</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 27:38<br>what are some other core elements of the Week, the weekly, the mid year review, and we can we can go from there. So I&#8217;ll I&#8217;ll just name some of the big elements. For me. I always try to make sure that my my video review contains some level of a goals evaluation. And so I want to look at each of the goals and determine that the goals are still the goals that they should be. So just thinking through, what are the goals that I have set out for this year? Or the next few years, right? Because I&#8217;m looking at it on a higher horizon here when we&#8217;re talking about goals. But then I&#8217;m looking at my projects, and those are going to be within the year to two years. And so I&#8217;m looking at both my projects and my goals. And I&#8217;m just doing that kind of kicking the tires on touching base with each of these things, do they need to be changed? Right? Do I need to reevaluate whether or not I&#8217;m going to reach one of those goals? And something that I&#8217;m not as good at? And I would like to get better at is not? When I when I reevaluate those goals to communicate that to stakeholders, right? It&#8217;s just making sure that folks know that I&#8217;ve, I&#8217;ve re evaluated, I&#8217;ve chosen not to do it. And many times, I&#8217;m not sharing that with other people, or whatever that might be, you know, just feelings of, of not being as productive as I want it to be in that particular year, or whatever it might be. And I&#8217;ll just like set it aside. And I think it&#8217;s better for us to just like in a good GTD practice for those of you who are GTD practitioners, right? It&#8217;s your need to renegotiate and then communicate, right? So you need to make sure that if you&#8217;re going to renegotiate a commitment that you&#8217;re going to let people know about that. I think that happens on the higher horizons as well happening on the projects. And the bowls level, I think really does help, especially if you have a spouse or partner, and you want to make sure that they&#8217;re on the same page as it relates to like, Okay, you gotta buy the house next year. And then you decided, well, no, I&#8217;m not going to, that&#8217;s probably something you should talk about with your spouse or partner, if you&#8217;ve made that internal decision, and you haven&#8217;t quite shared. So things of that nature. I like to look at performance metrics. And so these performance metrics can be as simple or as complex as you&#8217;d like them to be. I take things like the number of captures that I since I can actually track the number of captures I make throughout the year. I then track how many actions I complete. And while those are not the same thing, right? The number of things that come in, many of those get deleted, but the number of actions I complete are also a unit EAC metric. And so I look at those in comparison. So if I&#8217;m capturing 100 things a week, and I&#8217;m completing 15 to 20 of those next actions on my list, is that the right balance, and then I can look at that kind of on a broader level, on the mid year level, that semi annual review, I can say, Okay, well, I&#8217;ve collected 3000 items in the course of six months, that&#8217;s not unusual for me, I&#8217;m capturing throughout the day, and I&#8217;ve completed roughly about six or 700 next actions than I can, I can understand that I&#8217;m on track, like, that&#8217;s a good, that&#8217;s a good ratio for me to know that I&#8217;m moving toward the things that need to get done in my world, even not knowing the substance of the items, just the numbers can tell me that I&#8217;m on track. And that&#8217;s, that&#8217;s an important thing for me, you need to figure out what that is for you. Right? It could be the number of projects completed, it could be the number of events that you&#8217;ve hosted, or the number of meetings that you&#8217;ve attended, or reducing that number of meetings you&#8217;ve attended, which will then increase your discretionary time, and therefore, your productivity, right, like we need to, we need to understand some of these numbers. And we have the data now we have what it&#8217;s like all there, you know, unless you are completely bullet journaling on paper, and you keep a calendar in the bullet journal, and you have no data whatsoever, somebody else probably has that data systems about you. And therefore you could probably get that data and understand yourself better. So some level of performance metrics can be really useful. This is not all of them. But I&#8217;ll close on my whole section with just it&#8217;s, this is a really good time. Just like how David Allen talks about in your weekly review, this is a time to to look at your various tools and make sure they&#8217;re in good working order, I have a tendency to not do that during my weekly review, because I think it&#8217;s just too often that you&#8217;re that you&#8217;re tweaking and trying to play around with your different tools. And so I like to do during my semi annual review, or the mid year review, is this notion of looking at my systems, my daily routine and my tools and spending that time to hone them, right, like, Okay, I have this new webcam, and it&#8217;s just I&#8217;m constantly frustrated by a couple things about it, right? So how do I, how do I optimize my usage of it, you know, like, Okay, I need to make sure that I maybe get another webcam, or maybe I just need to do some tweaking of this webcam so that it&#8217;s consistently in the right place, and whatever, I need to maybe learn how to use the webcam better, right? Those, there&#8217;s a lot of moving parts to this webcam. And so I just need to learn how to how to learn, you know, this becomes a project, right, I&#8217;m gonna capture that, and it&#8217;s going to become a project, learn how to use the webcam better. And now now that I knew all the features, now my system is going to be better, because I&#8217;m going to be more, I&#8217;m going to be less fragile, right, I&#8217;m going to be more anti fragile when it comes to operating the webcam in the heat of my day. And so these are the times where we can look at it and say, you know, what, actually, I&#8217;ve been, you know, trying to, you know, do these things in my morning routine, and they just don&#8217;t flow together, how can I just swap a few things around so that I do them in a better order, and therefore it creates a little less friction for me, and a little less friction, maybe for spouse, partner, the dog, cat, whatever. And so everybody can kind of have a more, you know, fluid day, because, you know, those kinds of just changing, like when you brush your teeth in the morning can be a huge change to your routine, but it can also be a huge benefit. Because it&#8217;s like, okay, you&#8217;re taking that, you know, five, six minutes in the bathroom, when your spouse is actually trying to go to the bathroom. And so, you know, it&#8217;s like, okay, well, if I just move it to a different time, then that person is not frustrated that much in the morning, and little things like that can actually like save a marriage. So, you know, like, think think through these, these these moments, and figure out what you can do to change just little things in your daily routine that can actually give you a great deal of reward. Right? It may be that, you know, like you brush your teeth before you kiss your spouse in the morning. And like little things like that, that can just be a huge, you know, like you think you don&#8217;t think about those things, because you&#8217;re just trying to get things done. But a little bit of foresight really goes a long way. So I feel like this is this is the time to think about those things. Because you can say you know what, you know, so and so just complains all the time about x and y, you know that I leave the rubbish, you know, bag by the side of the door in the evenings. You know what I could take that out before I go to bed as opposed to right before the garbage people come? And that&#8217;s going to make the spouse or partner that means happier that the rubbish isn&#8217;t sitting there overnight. Right? Who cares? Whether it is or not, right? It&#8217;s about the fact that you care about your spouse, spouse or partner not being frustrated by this tiny element. And of course you could change it right? So unless there&#8217;s a really good reason for you not doing it, like the raccoons get it every day every night, you know, you know, like maybe then you get a garbage can you put it in the garbage can, you know, like, you can figure these things out, but this is the time to think about it right. All the things frustrate you and frustrate the people around you. cuz of the way you live, your idiosyncrasies really affect the bolts, right? And, and so this is the time to really improve those things. And it makes your life easier when other people like being around you. So just something to think about.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 35:15<br>I think this is one of those opportunities when you&#8217;re looking at your medeor view to decide things to kill off. That&#8217;s something we don&#8217;t typically give ourselves permission to do. We&#8217;ll commit to things, we&#8217;ll put something on our roadmap, and we let it linger. We hope it&#8217;ll go away on its own. But there are certain times you just need to say, look, this is not going to happen, I&#8217;m not going to do this situation has changed. This is that, that chance to say, look, I&#8217;m going to start pruning this list down. And if you want to use that analogy, think about it like a hedge or a tree or something, you&#8217;re going to go out and you&#8217;re going to prune it. Why do you do that? Well, one, it makes prettier, but two, it&#8217;s for the health of that thing. And it&#8217;s the same thing here, these lingering items, these lingering projects that you have, for some reason decided are no longer going to be part of your mix, need to be pruned off, or else No, you will impact your overall mental health, and the health of your other projects that are going on. I think</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 36:11<br>it&#8217;s really important to do, and set aside time, whether that be at the beginning or at the end of your media review for basically, pure reflection. And this can be expansive, creative thinking, and just gives you the the opportunity to capture new things. I have a frequent phrase that I use with people, I don&#8217;t typically say it to their face, but I think it when they say it, which is that when they&#8217;re like, Oh, I&#8217;m bored, I always think that&#8217;s because you&#8217;re boring. And while it&#8217;s not the nicest thing to think it is just a reality, which is that you have been given the opportunity to live in this day and time, and you have all the opportunities available to you in and on the planet. Especially if you&#8217;re listening to this podcast, right? You&#8217;re you&#8217;re you&#8217;re really given a great opportunity to just live a verdant life, you know, like plant the seeds and, and do do the work and cultivate a life that&#8217;s worth living. So if you are bored, that&#8217;s you&#8217;re not trying hard enough, right? There are so many things to do in the world and on the planet today. And so take them into your review, and capture those things. Like this is the time to think you know, like, if you want to take up a new hobby, if you want to be able to do a thing, there are so many things that you can do, you can fill your time, I know I can, I can fill my time all day with everything but work, right? So there are so many interesting things in the world. I&#8217;m constantly fascinated by those things. And so during my semi annual review, I get that opportunity to capture those things. And while I may never do them, right, they they&#8217;re all going on to that maybe list. The goal is to be able to figure out when you want something new to do you want to have a little bit of, of spice in your life, this is the time to go to that list and look at those things and excise them and see whether or not that&#8217;s something that you could you could do. Case in point I have recently decided that I am in like a little bit of a fitness kick in my life right now. And I&#8217;ve always been fit, but I you know, I&#8217;ve just taken it up a notch. But at the same time, I also recognize that at some point in my life, I will want to do things that are a little bit more sedentary. So I&#8217;ve decided to take up birding and birdwatching is the easiest sport in the planet. Just literally just park yourself somewhere and stare. And so, you know, there&#8217;s all kinds of things that birders do. And I&#8217;m sure there&#8217;s some people who listening that are that are up in arms right now, you know, with all the various you know, they hike and they do great good on you. But for me birding will be finding a spot and parking myself there. And, and just watching what nature brings to me. And the and so, you know, I&#8217;ve been I&#8217;ve been in this process of learning about birding not because I&#8217;m going to be doing it immediately. But because over the next, you know, probably 1015 years, I will spend more and more time traveling and doing more in nature, and I want to be able to be prepared for that. And so, you know, a semi annual review is really the right time for you to be able to to start thinking through, well, what does the next few years of my life look like? What did the next, you know, maybe five or 10 years gonna look like? And what can I do now? That can be interesting, that&#8217;s going to set me up for that type of success. Right? And so I got all the equipment, I got the books, you know, I got all the bonds, you know, book of all the North American birds, you know, and now it&#8217;s a challenge for me to go ahead and start, you know, checking off the birds I&#8217;ve already seen in life, you know, the common ones, and then thinking through Well, what are the birds that I want to go see and where are they located? Right, and what time of year are they going to be there and what I want to travel to that area in order to see them, right. This gives me a little bit of structure to my year now because I&#8217;m like, Okay, well, you know what, I want to be there in October. Wilbur, I want to be there in January, I want to, I want to think about where I want to be traveling. So I can see these particular species, there&#8217;s something really positive about being able to have something to look forward to. That&#8217;s not It&#8217;s not grand. But it&#8217;s certainly not boring. And so you know, don&#8217;t be bored. Because it really doesn&#8217;t make you boring. It makes you less, you know, it makes you less desirous to be around. And I think this is something just to, like, do in any review, whatever it might be, is to think through your levels of gratitude to things. What are you grateful for in life right now. And I think it&#8217;s a good way to, to end any session to close a particular session, is to just think through what what are you grateful for? What do you appreciate in in about your life, and this is, again, that curating your emotional world for the future. If you think gratitude today, you will have greater emotional regulation tomorrow and the next day and the next day. So really think about what you&#8217;re grateful for. And you&#8217;d be surprised force yourself to do this, like you really think through like, I want to write down 10 things I&#8217;m grateful for, at the end of a semiannual review, you&#8217;d be surprised at the number of things that you can come up with, that could be very simple, or they could be much larger items. If you do this practice on a semi regular basis, you will feel better about the things you have versus the things that you don&#8217;t. And if you can want more of what you have and less of what you don&#8217;t, you&#8217;re just going to be happier in life. And I&#8217;m by no means a minimalist. So I&#8217;m not talking about this from a physical goods perspective. But I really mean it from a perspective of just wanting what you have in life and being happy about it, because you never know when you&#8217;re not going to have it anymore. And that loss aversion will really increase your eudaimonia. And so I could just leave you all with that, with that thought</p> <p>Francis Wade 41:49<br>Bond valuable to think in terms of projects, and wherever possible to productize. Commitment, like the one one that you just mentioned to the bird watching, you know, my wife and I have a similar one. No, we both picked up Duolingo. We talked about on a previous episode, there were both Duolingo ing. But so it kind of wasn&#8217;t started off as a bit of a lark to kind of see what this thing was like. But now we actually have a project, we hope to go to Panama in October. No, it may or may not happen for whatever reason, but it&#8217;s at least a project. You know, so both of us are sticking to it because we don&#8217;t want to get there and embarrass ourselves we think so you know, it puts some skin in the game and makes a commitment real. So that&#8217;s very different than just doing a bunch of Duolingo never ending and just kind of having an unreal project around it does add a certain level of urgency and accountability and gives you a structure and gives you a due date to get things done by when I used to do triathlons, it was the same it was a tremendous forcing function did the same did the same job. They mean, wherever, wherever possible, turn the thing into a project with it, which has to do data as some kind of event which is, I guess what our conferences are for us in our business at the free conferences I mentioned earlier, they cap a year of activity, so to speak. But it comes to a definite sort of a hit as a summit. But it comes to a definite kind of endpoint or a point of accomplishment where something either will happen or won&#8217;t happen. And that clarifies everything that comes before it.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 43:41<br>This has been a great conversation. Thank you, gentlemen, we always have to think about how the world works around us. And the media review is a really good time for us to be able to do that. It&#8217;s just think about the world around us as opposed to being in the moment and living in the world. We can kind of take that view and look at it from a little bit from the outside and help make it just better, you know paving a better path for ourselves, or at least filling in the potholes. While we are at the end of our discussion. The conversation doesn&#8217;t stop here. If you have a question or comment about what we&#8217;ve discussed during this cast, please visit our episode page on productivity cast dotnet there on the podcast website at the bottom of the page. Feel free to leave a comment or question. We read and respond to comments and questions there. as well. You&#8217;re invited to join our listeners group inside personal productivity club, a digital community for personal productivity enthusiast that I host where you can interact with V ProductivityCast team directly to join for free visit ProductivityCast dotnet forward slash community and you can get started there. I want to express my thanks to Augusto Pinaud Francis Wade, and art Gelwicks for joining me here on ProductivityCast Each week, you can learn more about them and their work by visiting productivitycast.net and visiting the about page. I&#8217;m Ray Sidney-Smith. And on behalf of all of us here at productivity Cast here&#8217;s to your productive life</p> <p>Voiceover Artist 45:02<br> And that&#8217;s it for this ProductivityCast, the weekly show about all things productivity, with your hosts, Ray Sidney-Smith and Augusto Pinaud with Francis Wade and Art Gelwicks.</p> <p></div> <p><a href="http://w3cwebservices.com/pcast/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2023/07/141-how-to-conduct-a-mid-year-review-productivitycast.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener nofollow">Download a PDF of raw, text transcript of the interview here</a>.</p>
play-circle icon
45 MIN
Defining Personal Productivity
MAR 20, 2023
Defining Personal Productivity
<p>Today, the ProductivityCast team talks about terminology, that is, what are the terms that we use in the personal productivity space? And why is there so much confusion around those particular words that we use?</p> <p>(If you’re reading this in a podcast directory/app, please visit <a href="https://productivitycast.net/140">https://productivitycast.net/140</a> for clickable links and the full show notes and transcript of this cast.)</p> <p>Enjoy! <a href="http://productivitycast.net/contact/">Give us feedback</a>! And, thanks for listening!</p> <p>If you&#8217;d like to continue discussing <strong>Defining Personal Productivity </strong>from this episode, please <a href="#reply-title">click here to leave a comment</a> down below (this jumps you to the bottom of the post).</p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">In this Cast | <strong>Defining Personal Productivity</strong></h2> <p><a href="http://productivitycast.net/about/">Ray Sidney-Smith</a></p> <p><a href="http://productivitycast.net/about/">Augusto Pinaud</a></p> <p><a href="http://productivitycast.net/about/">Art Gelwicks</a></p> <p><a href="https://productivitycast.net/about/">Francis Wade</a></p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">Show Notes | <strong>Defining Personal Productivity</strong></h2> <p><em>Resources we mention, including links to them, will be provided here. Please listen to the episode for context.</em></p> <p></p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">Raw Text Transcript | <strong>Defining Personal Productivity</strong></h2> <p><em>Raw, unedited and machine-produced text transcript so there may be substantial errors, but you can search for specific points in the episode to jump to, or to reference back to at a later date and time, by keywords or key phrases. The time coding is mm:ss (e.g., 0:04 starts at 4 seconds into the cast’s audio).</em></p> <span><a onclick="read_toggle(1000247581, '', ''); return false;" class="read-link" id="readlink1000247581" style="readlink" href="#"></a></span> <div class="read_div" id="read1000247581" style="display: none;"></p> <p>Voiceover Artist 0:00<br>Are you ready to manage your work and personal world better to live a fulfilling productive life, then you&#8217;ve come to the right place. ProductivityCast the weekly show about all things productivity, here are your hosts, Ray Sidney-Smith and Augusto Pinaud with Francis Wade and Art Gelwicks.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 0:17<br>Welcome back, everybody to ProductivityCast, the weekly show about all things personal productivity. I&#8217;m Ray Sidney-Smith.</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 0:23<br>I&#8217;m Augusto Pinaud.</p> <p>Francis Wade 0:24<br>I&#8217;m Francis Wade.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 0:25<br>And I&#8217;m Art Gelwicks.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 0:26<br>Welcome, gentlemen, and welcome to our listeners to this episode. Today, we are going to be talking about terminology. That is, what are the terms that we use in the personal productivity world, and really, why there is so much confusion around those particular words that we use the importance of them. And then we&#8217;ll talk about some of the terms that we all have defined over time. Some words, we&#8217;ve created some terms, or phrases we&#8217;ve created, and why. And then, of course, what we can do to make this a little bit more useful for everybody. And so let&#8217;s start off with why is this important? What&#8217;s the importance of the productivity terminology, the personal productivity, terminology that we use every day,</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 1:11<br>when, when I begin working into personal productivity and researching into practice, personal productivity, one of the things that surprised me was the definition that most people have off time. Mostly because the definition has nothing to do with time and everything to do with scarcity. Actually, if you pull a dictionary, the definition that most people have of time is actually the definition of viscosity. So as you look and begin from the wrong definition, to build personal productivity, the only thing you can do is build a rock model. You know, when you start with wrong assumptions, it&#8217;s hard to build something that actually works. And that works for you. And that is the problem. And that happened was so many of the definitions plus invented work that some experts for color in some way are so people who study to spend time and study and decide to create to define things that it makes sense on the sale of the book that they&#8217;re trying to do, but not necessarily on the definitions that people manage. And all that create. Over the long term is confusion.</p> <p>Francis Wade 2:28<br>I think it&#8217;s an unavoidable confusion because we are talking about psychological objects, not physical objects. And psychological objects have a history to them. They change over time. And they&#8217;re they&#8217;re made up and they are, they&#8217;re very dependent on Lang on the language that you happen to be speaking in. We had a conversation off air about German language, German, and how words get made up all the time. And that&#8217;s very easy to do when you&#8217;re talking about intangible psychological objects. It&#8217;s harder to do when you&#8217;re talking about a tree, which you know, a tree today is pretty much the same tree as it was million years ago. But something like insomnia is a pretty recently made up word, because like 100 years old, and the way we use it obviously, is very different than people thought about insomnia 100 years ago. So a word like time when Weinstein came along and led us to think very differently about time. And before clocks were invented in this 12 or 1300s. People thought very differently about time then also. So as we create these words, they allow us to do different things. They help us in some ways, they hold us back and others. But the truth is that the meanings keep changing. And the fact that they keep changing, meaning that we have to pay attention to them, if we want to use them to, for example, make improvements in our individual lives, we don&#8217;t have a choice. This is like a moving target. Bunch of moving targets.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 4:11<br>Yeah, to meet the definition, debate falls into the same realm as in rules for games. If you&#8217;re not playing by the same rules, you&#8217;re not going to know what the objectives are, you&#8217;re not going to accomplish or achieve the common goals. So if you use a parallel, say American football, if everybody does not know or agree to what a touchdown means, then anybody can run around saying they scored a touchdown. There&#8217;s a common definition, there is an agreed upon standard of measure. And that&#8217;s what so many definitions provide is that standardized concept of measure and unfortunately, within the productivity space, that seems to be one of the sponginess things that we have is getting everybody to agree on And what definitions actually are. And there&#8217;s two things that I run into all the time. And I&#8217;ve caught myself doing it. And I have to correct when I do it as well. One is I miss identification of definitions, applying the wrong definition for something, because that&#8217;s what we think it means. But we&#8217;re not 100%. Sure. The other one, and I almost want to say it&#8217;s a little bit more insidious is the adaptation of definitions to support a particular model, platform, agenda, whatever you want to say, to put something into place, so that it goes Oh, see, because productivity is x, my stuff is accurate as why? Well, that&#8217;s assuming that everybody agrees that x is what productivity is, and I don&#8217;t believe that&#8217;s the case. And so many, so many situations. So having a common definition for things that is, I don&#8217;t want to say globally, agreed upon, but as closely commonly agreed upon as possible, really makes this even approachable. When we start to look at improving people&#8217;s productivity and efficiency.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 6:15<br>I somewhat agree. And I think that what you&#8217;re talking about there, art is probably why I have so many terms of art that I have created for all kinds of personal productivity situations, except that mine was built out of necessity, not out of building a model, and then choosing to shove a square peg into a round hole, it was, oh, this thing that I&#8217;m doing needs for me to define it. So I can explain it to others. And so it became a just a need to be able to create something to contain that new thought, that new method process or whatnot. And so I&#8217;m hopefully doing it on the opposite side of what you&#8217;re talking about, which is I&#8217;m not, I&#8217;m not creating something and then trying to pigeonhole these pieces into it. But really choosing to embrace the, the term because it helps it&#8217;s helpful in being able to explain it to others, I also find that my biggest challenge with personal productivity terminology is that we don&#8217;t know whose term we&#8217;re using, when we talk about any given term. If someone says to me, something I know like a time demand, I&#8217;m very clear, in the sense that I know that that came from a certain Francis Wade. And so if we go ahead and then say to me, Oh, well, a time demand is something else, not the one that I know is the term or the phrase created by Francis that I&#8217;m lost. And we don&#8217;t have that kind of contextual framework. Right now, in the personal productivity community, people will use certain things like task or to do or even personal productivity, but they haven&#8217;t really given us the foundation for what they mean by that. And when we enter into conversation, we&#8217;re not in the appropriate context, you&#8217;re talking about time blocking, or time boxing, or any of those other terms that are kind of loose, they can be defined many different ways. We&#8217;re talking past each other, because you may think of it as being something very different than I think of it as being frequently, you know, we use the methodology getting things done. If we all were to define what getting things done well is today, we&#8217;d all have different definitions. And that is because we take pieces from the methodology. And I find that to also be somewhat confusing for people, when we then take that from the kind of macro level, have a methodology and when we bleed it down to the very individual pieces. Methods are incredibly difficult to, quote unquote, define because they are by nature, instructional. And so when we, when we try to give terms to things, they end up becoming confusing for people, because if I say GTD, or I say weekly review, or if I say next action, those three things are unique. Only one of them, by definition, will be useful to you, right? Because getting things done, or GTD is going to be a method and instruction, weekly review, same thing. Maybe you can define it in a in a core way. But it&#8217;s still going to be confusing without giving you step by step instructions. But the next action I can actually define and tell you what it is, I can I can say it is a physical next step I can see you doing that will move a project forward. So it brings something to completion. And so the next action is something that we can define the other things we can describe, in that sense, Francis,</p> <p>Francis Wade 9:39<br>the way you&#8217;re getting things done as defined, most people define as a time management book. Wikipedia defines that way the author doesn&#8217;t. Let&#8217;s that&#8217;s just as basic as it gets. If he&#8217;s saying that it&#8217;s not about this, everybody else say saying it is about this. That&#8217;s right at the heart of you know what we&#8217;re about in terms of of improvement in that area.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 10:01<br>There&#8217;s also a big difference between defining a thing, or a specific concept. And what we&#8217;re terming or we often see termed as definitions that are broad concepts and weekly reviews, the one that just jumped to mind for me, because we understand kind of what that is, you can write down a one or two sentence definition, I&#8217;m using air quotes. But it doesn&#8217;t mean that that&#8217;s an accurate definition, because that&#8217;s a complex process. A weekly review has multiple steps, multiple ways, engaging it, it is by its very design different for individuals and processes and various platforms. So defining something that that by its very nature is, I don&#8217;t want to say undefinable, but designed to be malleable. Just clutters the entire conversation. And we have to break it down further. GTD is one of those that you get into a challenge of capital, GTD versus lowercase GTD and just having a conversation, say, Yeah, I want to get things done doesn&#8217;t mean I&#8217;m talking about getting things done. It&#8217;s the Kleenex effect. So we have to be very careful with our terminology, not necessarily from the standpoint of, do I need everything to be exactly defined? No. But what I do need to recognize is that some terms require more than just a line in a glossary. They&#8217;re much more complex, and they have to be broken down to be able to get everybody onto the same page.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 11:45<br>And last on this topic is is the fact that many of the time management, personal productivity, and otherwise used words, they&#8217;re pulled from different arenas, they&#8217;re pulled from, sometimes psychology, sometimes project management, they&#8217;re pulled from different fields of experience. And those fields of study or experience are, they&#8217;re not the same thing, when we bring them into personal productivity, they become this a different entity. And so what we perceive as being say, a professional activity, in say, the project management space becomes very different in the personal productivity space. And that creates confusion. And then the The worst is when we take psychological terms, and we use them in popular psychological parlance. And so therefore, it becomes this topic or of discussion around things like consciousness, or people talking about, you know, unconscious items and those kinds of things. You know, I tend to be a little bit clinical in that sense, my, you know, in the way in which I speak about those terms. And yet, at the same time, I&#8217;m not necessarily working with the psychological definition in those senses, and then does create confusion. And I think that it&#8217;s one of the things that we have to walk a tight line with, there&#8217;s a there&#8217;s a tightrope walk, as it relates to many of these pseudo psychological terms. I wish that we could just banish the word subconscious from all productivity language altogether, just never that we can all just agree never to use it again. And we would all be better off for it. Because there&#8217;s just a maligning of the term. And I&#8217;m sure that Freud would be rolling over in his grave. If he knew how much we use that term, incorrectly, most of the time,</p> <p>Francis Wade 13:34<br>equals equals the question, why is it so difficult to Why is personal productivity terminology so difficult to understand? I think we&#8217;re agreeing that there&#8217;s a lack of common ground, which is what our call it today is about, right? It&#8217;s about creating common ground, at least between the four of us, the rest of the world may disagree vehemently, but at least we&#8217;re putting a stake in the ground to see okay, there are lots of definitions floating around makes communication difficult. It makes understanding hard, it makes progress impossible. But by fixing certain terms in certain ways, we&#8217;re hoping to give everybody a firm foundation upon which the build</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 14:13<br>Absolutely. And so today&#8217;s episode is about us going a little bit further toward that shared space in terms of what can we all either agree on or show where we do contrast. And that contrasting is not bad. And that&#8217;s the that&#8217;s the thing that I want to welcome everyone in the personal productivity community to is that, you know, as we frequently do here on ProductivityCast, we don&#8217;t agree on everything, but we can come to the boundaries of where those things are gray or are hard lines in terms of agreement and disagreement and find use in that. And it&#8217;s not that you know, every recommendation I ever give is going to be useful to people and likewise for each of us, but it will resonate Meet with someone who&#8217;s listening somewhere at some time. And so it&#8217;s really useful for everybody to be able to hear what helps others in that sense. And so I think defining things is just really helpful in in that way. So let&#8217;s start with perhaps a few terms, I think time management is probably a really good place to start. And then personal productivity. And I will just make the caveat that no matter what personal productivity is, is, I think the appropriate term for us to use when we use the term productivity, generally, it ends up bleeding into the confusion, confusion realm, again, because productivity is typically an economics term, when we when we talk about labor, and that becomes just very, very difficult for people to understand. So just know that when we&#8217;re using the term productivity, we&#8217;re really meeting personal productivity. And for the most part, we should always be using the term personal productivity so that we know that we&#8217;re talking about the the broader language around time management, and personal performance. So let&#8217;s start with time management. How would you all define time management,</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 16:17<br>time management is one of those tricky ones. That&#8217;s, that&#8217;s one that&#8217;s a landmine waiting to happen, because you have to deconstruct the the term before you start to define it. And we&#8217;ve already identified that defining time is a hard one. So time management, at least in common parlance, to me is the effective management of what can be accomplished in a fixed resource, which in this case, is time because time is invaluable, you can&#8217;t add time you can&#8217;t take it away, it&#8217;s just what it is. So managing to time is actually the more accurate definition of it in my mind. And the term time management, I think creates its own problem. Because you&#8217;re you can&#8217;t manage something that is inflexible. So it&#8217;s almost a term that I, you know, this is going to be a problem with this series that we do here, I&#8217;m going to want to throw out a bunch of terms that I use, I&#8217;m not going to want to use them anymore. And the more I think about time management, time management is one of those terms, I&#8217;m thinking that I want to throw out. Because there&#8217;s no way to easily say, time management means anything useful. Because by its definition, you are asking someone to do the impossible.</p> <p>Francis Wade 17:45<br>The same problem is recognized by academics, at least in the psychology world, where most of the time management research has been done. And there are a few, like a few papers that basically say there is no common definition. But it hasn&#8217;t stopped people from writing about the same or different academics writing about it without defining it. So it&#8217;s a it&#8217;s a mega problem, I think. And I wrote a wrote a paper on it after studying the problem for a year trying to figure out okay, what does time mean? And what does management mean? We put the two together, what do you get, and I was trying to solve the problem for, you know, the common manager and subordinate, that a manager says to his or her subordinate that isn&#8217;t used to improve your time management. The subordinate really should ask, Which definition are you using? That should be the next question. Because you really, you really don&#8217;t know what school of thought what what symptom he or she really has in mind, that makes him or her think that oh, you need your time management issues. I&#8217;ve also talked to lots of people potential clients, who are potentially perennially late, they can&#8217;t get to their email, they or they don&#8217;t have time for exercise or family and they say, Oh, time management issues and they say, oh, no, no, I&#8217;m really good at time management. And I, you know, whatever definition they&#8217;re using, includes includes their skill, whatever their skin happens to me, it doesn&#8217;t cover all the defects in their day to day living that i From the outside looking in a scrape the time management issues. So it&#8217;s a it&#8217;s a core problem, you can&#8217;t have conversations unless you have a you can&#8217;t do we can&#8217;t really do research, unless you have a definition to begin with. And I think what you&#8217;re seeing there art is that the deeper you go to define time and define management, it actually takes you into the world have more psychological objects, and more and more and behind those there are more and behind those are more. And like I said before, psychological objects, the meaning of them changes over time. So by For Einstein, time management may have meant something and after Einstein, it definitely means something different. So for even for us to have a conversation about it, we&#8217;d have to agree on a working definition and then say, Okay, well, that&#8217;s our starting point. That&#8217;s our building block. No, we can talk about it. But that&#8217;s a necessary step,</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 20:17<br>take the term and reverse it. And I think all of a sudden, we&#8217;ve got a different structure, instead of talking about time management, if we talk about managing time, well, we&#8217;ve all agreed at the beginning that we can&#8217;t change time, the only thing you know, if you try to manage time, it&#8217;s assuming that something&#8217;s broken there, the only thing that can be broken there as your clock doesn&#8217;t work, right. But with the types of things you just described, its workload issues, its throughput issues, its efficiency issues, none of those have to do with actually time, it&#8217;s a matter of what can be accomplished. And defining the period that you feel that you can accomplish those in but that period is well without your well outside your realm of control. So the exercise of going through and defining terminology, I think we&#8217;re seeing this as an excellent case of it, the terminology has to be deconstructed to understand exactly does it even apply to the concepts that are there, I can&#8217;t think of a case where you are, you would truly be able to manage time. Therefore it makes it no erroneous statement. You can manage your workload, you can manage all those other things, but I can&#8217;t make time take longer or shorter. Therefore, it doesn&#8217;t help anyone, myself included, to try to measure things and evaluate the effectiveness of platform changes and methodologies. Based on time management as a concept,</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 21:55<br>what I want to do is give a few definitions. And then we can go from there, which is to say that Wikipedia, definition of time management, I think, to be confusing, and interesting, all wrapped up in a bubble. And so Wikipedia defines time management, as quoting here, the process of planning and exercising conscious control of the time spent on specific activities, especially to increase effectiveness, efficiency, and productivity, and quote, I&#8217;ll just leave it there, as to how you create confused confusion among people. I will note for myself, I like to take things and parse them apart, so I can understand them. And I generally think of time as a relative experience of past, present, and future and knowing what those three things are, and the measurement thereof. So time itself is something that we know and can measure as being happened before now or later. And we can we have this relative experience of that. And then of course management is for me, I tend to think of the practice of applying control or influence on people and objects. And as Francis noted, you know, you can have psychological objects, and you can have physical objects. And soon we&#8217;ll have virtual objects. But at the present moment, we, we know how to apply some level of control or influence on people and things generally in our worlds. And once it becomes a practice something that we actually do do over and over again, that is management. So we take those two words, together, time management becomes the practice of those two things. And it becomes less about the actual time and more about what we&#8217;re doing inside of that time. And so that&#8217;s where the the two words coming together, as art noted becomes somewhat contradictory, because you&#8217;re not capable of actually controlling the time. So when we take the two words together, then becomes an means something different, which is then the practice of applying or controlling, you know, applying control or influence on people and objects becomes the issue toward greater effectiveness, greater efficiency within your present, right or your future presumably. So it&#8217;s applying that kind of work to how do I control or influence both myself because I&#8217;m a people right on people and objects in the the present or the near future. So that I can actually whatever it is, be more efficient, be more effective in that course of time. So that for me is what time management is. Agree, disagree. Do you have other thoughts that percolate from that,</p> <p>Francis Wade 24:50<br>I think is a workable definition. The challenge I have with it is that it for the same same actions that you take you could also call them personal productivity. And it could be just as useful. So if I decide to time block my calendar, I could say I&#8217;m using a time management technique, someone else could say I&#8217;m using a personal productivity technique. And they&#8217;re both right. So they&#8217;re both, to me, they&#8217;re both photo handles on the problem, which are useful, you know, it&#8217;s like a point of entry, or a suitcase has a handle on it so that you can carry it, it&#8217;s a level that you to accomplish something bigger. So I think the time management as you define it is one handle on the suitcase. personal productivity could be another handle on the suitcase. Task Management could be another handle on the suitcase. But getting things done is which is kind of task management is another handle on the suitcase. I think all the different handles are, you know, they have their place. There are not exclusive definitions. And they are very culturally, you know, for those of us who are productivity geeks, we use particular language because it allows us to put a handle on the suitcase and then carry it. So nothing wrong with it. It&#8217;s just that it&#8217;s not a psychological object, you&#8217;ve got to be aware that you&#8217;re in this zone in which these definitions can change. And they have usefulness. And they&#8217;re probably useful for a time. And then after a while is that being useful? They I wrote an article on the word melancholy. So melancholy was like a big thing over 100 years ago. So people talked about that was like, you have a melancholy melancholy today. What we don&#8217;t know what the heck that is. But back then it was a useful level on a particular kind of intervention, you probably went and did exercise to get rid of the melancholy you travel to the Caribbean to get rid of the minute. And we&#8217;re still doing those things today. We just don&#8217;t use the handle of melancholy today. So I think it&#8217;s fine. I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s a it&#8217;s not like an obstacle. It&#8217;s just that when we&#8217;re using when we&#8217;re using these terms as think we need to be cognizant that what&#8217;s the word there, they&#8217;ve lived their limited usefulness there. And if they kept tempted to get the job done, then by all means use it. But people go a step further, and then turn these things into religions. And that&#8217;s where problems start. Because then they want to lock into one definition, and then insist that everybody else use that definition and not use whatever handle you want to use, because your handle is inferior to mine. And then you get into a different whole different kind of problem. But that problem infects every, I think affects every school of thought. And I think part of what we&#8217;re trying to do is to at least say, Let&#8217;s agree on the common school of thought. And then let&#8217;s try and make improvements based on what our agreement looks like.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 27:57<br>Noting that I do see time management and personal productivity as uniquely distinct to things. And the reason for that is that management, that practice of applying controller influence on people and objects, the thing on which we&#8217;re trying to apply that control or influence becomes different, it becomes more granular when we talk about, say, project management, or when we talk about performance management, because we&#8217;re talking about these kinds of things like fitness is a type of management. And we have many different types of fitnesses. So I do see personal productivity as being an umbrella term. And we&#8217;ll get to that shortly. But it becomes an umbrella term for the other types of things in which we, in which we manage, we have task management, time management, product, project management, and so on, so forth. Those are all things that fall underneath the umbrella in just in my view. And again, I could be I could be convinced otherwise, but that&#8217;s just how I&#8217;ve constructed my own latticework of terminology so that I can control the the view of where all of these various terms fall into my own world.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 29:05<br>Yeah, not too badly paraphrase the movie Dune, but if you can define a thing, you can control a thing. And that&#8217;s when we look at these terms. I&#8217;m not an English major by far, but the terms that we&#8217;re throwing out here are a composite of a noun and a verb. Task Management, note management, time management, it&#8217;s our the thing at the beginning is the noun, but the verb is the action that we&#8217;re going to apply to that. And if you look at these terms, we understand what notes are, but do we notes are different for people, we understand what tasks are but doing tasks are different. And then to apply this generic amorphous concept of management to those things. Makes the definition harder to understand rather than clarifying it. And that&#8217;s where I think we have to be very careful as well. As people who operate within this space and as professionals in this space, we have to be careful that we do not misconstrue to people. A term as a definition, as not a fixed point of measure. This is not an indicator on a ruler. This is a larger concept. This is something that requires understanding, interpretation and evaluation. And we have to be clear with that do not go through and say, Yeah, this is what that means. If you can&#8217;t say exactly what that is, and show it and define it in such a way that there is no debate between multiple people, then it&#8217;s not a definition. It&#8217;s a concept. And we have to look at things from that perspective,</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 30:46<br>is difficult because as we were discussing, every definition, it&#8217;s not a definition, if I build a dictionary right now, and any work that we consider, okay, that&#8217;s a definition. The problem here is personal productivity, time management, we start with a definition, good or bad, deep or not deep doesn&#8217;t matter. And then we start adding our own salsa to to those tacos, you know, it&#8217;s, we are making tacos, but then each one of us are going to add their own salsa, and that is a real taco. And that is the reason as in tacos is so hard to find a good one. Okay, because it&#8217;s only good one, you know, when have your own friends were saying when it&#8217;s your own handle, that that&#8217;s the only handle that work. So the problem is how we standardize something that has been completely honest, standarized, number one, and number two, where every industry comes with their own terms, and then we try to grasp them up and really apply the one that will benefit us the most. So when I talk to clients, one of the things that is fun, and we talk about personal productivity and time management, well, it depends. The definition in general is what is going to make them look good, not what necessarily, the definition will help them to move forward.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 32:24<br>That&#8217;s another one that we haven&#8217;t really dug into. But and I don&#8217;t want to dig into it right now. But there&#8217;s a lot of terminology that has been created just to support marketable concepts. And we have to be very, some of them, some of whom are very good. Some of the terminology works. Bullet Journal is, as an example, the terminology works, it kind of describes the thing, but it has become this def this generic term. This is bullet journaling. Well, what is it? It&#8217;s still too broad still to open. And I even take a little bit issue with personal productivity as a as a term because we can&#8217;t really define it because it&#8217;s a counter term to something else. If it&#8217;s personal productivity, what&#8217;s the alternative? Because there has to be something else otherwise, you wouldn&#8217;t have had to define it in the first place. And that would be non personal. Is that work productivity? Is corporate productivity as a business? Where what is the counterpoint to that definition to be able to provide us the perspective and relevance to understand what these are? And if we don&#8217;t go through and look at those counter positions and say, oh, okay, it&#8217;s not that. So it&#8217;s this, I can understand why people get so confused. When they look at various tools, they look at methodologies, and they say, Oh, they&#8217;re all using the same term. They&#8217;re all using the same reference language, but they&#8217;re using it in totally different ways. And that lack of standardization, I think, really drags down a lot of what we&#8217;re talking about here, it makes it harder, to be more quote, productive. And we still haven&#8217;t even gotten back to the definition of what the heck is productive.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 34:13<br>I hear what you&#8217;re saying aren&#8217;t. And I do understand that there is a piece here which is potentially reductive, or at least derivative, from the perspective that if we say the word productivity, or productive, we&#8217;re really utilizing terms from other fields. Again, productivity already came from from a space, which when we think about economics, or or in the professional sphere, it&#8217;s really a business term utilized for calculating output. All right, what effort required was required to create output. So we do have a definition for productivity, which is why I avoid it. When I talk a talk about personal productivity. I modify productivity to be personal so that it is in right relationship with what we&#8217;re really discussing, which is Have the practices that we utilize in our own world. And so I&#8217;ll just throw this out here, which is that I always define personal productivity in some combination of saying, it&#8217;s about doing the right things in the right amount to get the right results. And it is a an umbrella term, to explain that we have all of these pieces that come together. And I guess I&#8217;m just less concerned about the amorphousness of it, that it&#8217;s kind of a it&#8217;s like a black hole, it sucks everything in, you know, once you hit the event horizon, you&#8217;re in and you&#8217;re not coming back out. And so personal productivity ends up being that that omnibus term for me, as opposed to being something that needs to have a a clear cut. So precise definition that anyone touching, it is going to know exactly what it is because what what&#8217;s productive for you is not productive for me necessarily, and vice versa. And, and that is why that term ends up being more useful to me than not because it is more encompassing than not, it&#8217;s inclusive.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 36:10<br>I very much use the same definition. I use that all the time you do the right things in the right ways at the right times. But this, the more again, the more we kick this around. It&#8217;s a fascinating thought exercise to me, because when we talk about being productive, there&#8217;s a countermeasure to it, how do I know I&#8217;m not what is then the definition of being unproductive, or unproductivity, or lack of what however, badly, I want to mangle the English language that counterpoint really becomes the more critical because to meet the definition, you have to successfully stop being the other thing. So looking at the Merriam Webster Dictionary, definition of the word productive, just the first one here, having the quality or power of producing, especially in abundance. Well, right away, I&#8217;m going to take that tissue. I don&#8217;t agree with that definition. But in certain circumstances, in certain cases, yeah, I get that you are producing an output, you have a volume of production. But how often when we think about the things that we do, and the people we interact with, how many of those people are, quote, producing things in volume. If that, if that were truly the definition, commonly accepted of being productive, we would all be cranking widgets, we would all be doing piece work and generating as much stuff as we could. Regardless of quality, there&#8217;s no definite, there&#8217;s no indication of crew producing quality output. It&#8217;s the quality or power of producing of generation, it&#8217;s turning ribs on an engine. So this is where, again, I really struggle. And I know all of all four of us do this, when we coach people understand what that term means to you first, and then between the coach and the individual say, Okay, we&#8217;re going to work with that definition. And we&#8217;re going to find ways to apply that as your consistent measure,</p> <p>Francis Wade 38:27<br>for example, the working approach I use is to sort of bring in the human element. So are you right, that those kinds of production definitions are that&#8217;s what I was trained in as a as an operations research industrial engineer? At school, that&#8217;s those were the you know, we were we were primarily focused on machines. And the idea was that you would get the machine going and keep it as busy as for as long as possible. And, you know, it was, the idea was that you&#8217;re working with inanimate objects that produced something. So when, when, when that language got translated into the human world, the idea transferred, which is that yeah, sure, a human being wants to produce as much as possible. Of course, that doesn&#8217;t really work. Because human machine is a physical object and a human being is a psychological object. Or there&#8217;s aspects of our psychology that are so important that we can&#8217;t leave them behind. So I picked up a different I picked up a different approach. And I said, Okay, maybe productivity, and this is what I use with my clients pretty much productivity means accomplishing what you intend to accomplish without defects. No defects in this context is not the defects of producing widgets, but it&#8217;s stress. Having a life balance, managing All your email, all the things that people complain about, I pretty much made a list of them. And I said, Okay, these are all the defects or unwanted symptoms that people were trying to be productive are trying to rid themselves of. And some of them are very soft, some of them are harder, like missing a deadline is a pretty hard defect. But being free of time, stress or having peace of mind, is in a way a soft defect. But it doesn&#8217;t really matter. Because we as human beings want to be free of all the defects. So when I&#8217;m working with someone, the question is, well, which unwanted symptoms are top of mind for you? Which ones are you in particular, experiencing? That have had you call me in the first place? So we have a conversation about, I don&#8217;t use the word defects. But that&#8217;s what that&#8217;s really where my thinking is coming from? I&#8217;ll say What are you trying to get rid of? What do you what do you wish you never had, in terms of your experience. And so that&#8217;s, that&#8217;s my approach to sort of bringing in the fact that this is a human being struggling with psychological aspect of what looks like a production production process from a particular from industrial engineering point of view, it looks like a cycle a physical process. But it&#8217;s not</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 41:29<br>just in furtherance of your, your point at the beginning, Frances which is that many of these terms like business terminology came from military terminology. And that becomes even more difficult. Most of business terms really did come from a military hierarchical structure. And so those then have bled into no pun intended, the the world of, of productivity, personal productivity, and that has made it even more for me a little bit discomforting. To your other point about defects. I usually coined that as pain, people tend to know what what physical or emotional pain they&#8217;re experiencing. And so what you say as defect, I&#8217;m usually asking people for what challenges they&#8217;re facing. And I usually use the terminology pain, and and it helps to trigger for people something that they can relate to.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 42:21<br>The thing that occurred to me just as we&#8217;re talking about this is often the challenges people get into is they are trying to achieve someone else&#8217;s definition of the term. So for example, let&#8217;s let&#8217;s take a manager direct report conversation, its annual review time, and the manager goes, you need to be more productive to get that raise. If you stop there, you have a problem, you have a problem on both sides of the equation, because you have not set the rules, you have not set the definition, I guarantee there is no common understanding as to what that is to achieve that standard. And yet, that&#8217;s a conversation that happens all the time. Not only do you have it within organizations, we have it within just individual conversations, you have a conversation with your significant other, I wish you would get more done. It&#8217;s the same thing I wish you would be more productive. If define it, tell me what that standard is do you want is your definition of productivity, generating 14 TPS work reports by the end of day Friday. If that&#8217;s it, then okay, now I have something that I can go towards, because it&#8217;s a defined term in this context. And I think that&#8217;s the one thing that we keep skirting around a little bit is that these definitions are highly contextually sensitive, they will adapt, depending on the conversation, the work environment, the rule environment, even the people involved, we need to apply that as part of our understanding. And honestly, there&#8217;s nothing wrong with writing these things down and sharing them for common group people who are for common groups who are working towards an objective and saying, This is what it means when we say we&#8217;re being productive. This is what the measure is. And you have to be able to do that. I don&#8217;t know how many times I&#8217;ve gone through and defined systems for people. And the first thing we do is we have a glossary meeting, we put together a terminology list. And I&#8217;ll ask because I get to play that dumb consultant card and said, I don&#8217;t know what this stuff means, tell me what every one of these terms are. And we start talking through them like so this is what that term means. And guaranteed if it&#8217;s 10 people in the room, four of them are gonna look at each other and go, Well, that&#8217;s not what it means to me. And that becomes in this entire open discussion about the fact that they&#8217;ve never been playing by the same set of rules. So when we talk about things and the talking heads and on videos and on podcasts, you know, often will We&#8217;ll throw terms out saying, oh, yeah, everybody understands that. No, it is worth the effort to say, in this context, in this conversation, this is what this term means.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 45:12<br>We&#8217;ll actually tackle the terms side in the next episode, I think will be will be plenty of discussion for the next episode. But don&#8217;t leave any final thoughts we want to leave folks with before we close out today&#8217;s episode,</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 45:22<br>my my only thing is this is conversation you need to have not not us. But each person needs to have this conversation with themselves and the other people around them, and understand what those common measures are. And I think start with yourself, write these terms down and see how many of those you can actually put something next to, I&#8217;m willing to bet half of them, you&#8217;ll look at it and go, I don&#8217;t know what that actually means.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 45:49<br>I would encourage people to go out there and think of the terms that they have been reading, none of you listening have not come across many of the terms we have talked about today. And certainly many more. And you may have been floating along, thinking that you knew the definition, and are reading materials that actually also include those definitions. And I invite you to go look at the various blog articles you&#8217;ve read and see how the author, the how they define when they write the material. And whether that context makes sense to you now, just do a little bit of reflection on that. Because I think that it would it&#8217;s going to be illuminating to you to realize that many times the context is out of context, in terms of the term and you need to you need to yourself, find out what that person means, you know, just make a comment on the blog and say, Hey, you used time management in this article. What do you mean by time management, and just hearing the author comment back with their definition can sometimes be incredibly insightful, and useful to you understanding what they really meant in that article. And it&#8217;s not that their definition is wrong or right. As you can see, we all have different differing opinions, it&#8217;s that knowing what they mean, when they write about these topics, then helps to inform and if they don&#8217;t have a good definition for it, then you can apply your own and that will be useful as well. But I just really find it to be helpful to go out there and look at what you&#8217;re reading and question it be inquisitive as to what these terms are, what these phrases are that are being utilized, and whether or not the authors of these articles have a way of explaining them that can be useful to you. We&#8217;re gonna plant a flag in the sand. And we&#8217;re gonna come back next episode. And when we do, we&#8217;re going to talk about many of the terms that we have ourselves either come across and found issue with umbrage with their definitions, or that we have found lacking or avoid and we&#8217;ve created our own terms over the years and and explain the process by which we created those definitions. And so with that, thank you, gentlemen, for this conversation. We will leave it there and we will come back in our next episode to talk about the various personal productivity terms that we&#8217;ve created.</p> <p>Voiceover Artist 48:12<br>That&#8217;s it for this productivity cast, the weekly show about all things productivity with your hosts, Ray Sidney-Smith and Augusto Pinaud with Francis Wade and Art Gelwicks.</p> <p></p> <p></div> <p><a href="https://productivitycast.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2023/03/140-defining-personal-productivity-productivitycast_otter_ai.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Download a PDF of raw, text transcript of the interview here.</a></p>
play-circle icon
-1 MIN
Subjective versus Objective Time
MAR 13, 2023
Subjective versus Objective Time
<p>In this week’s episode, the <em>ProductivityCast </em>team debated subjective versus objective time as commentary on the article, “<a href="https://hbr.org/2021/06/my-fixation-on-time-management-almost-broke-me">My Fixation on Time Management Almost Broke Me</a>.”<br>Thanks to Brian C. for the recommended reading! (See <a href="https://www.personalproductivity.club/posts/14785370">https://www.personalproductivity.club/posts/14785370</a>.)</p> <p>(If you’re reading this in a podcast directory/app, please visit <a href="https://productivitycast.net/139">https://productivitycast.net/139</a> for clickable links and the full show notes and transcript of this cast.)</p> <p>Enjoy! <a href="http://productivitycast.net/contact/">Give us feedback</a>! And, thanks for listening!</p> <p>If you&#8217;d like to continue discussing <strong>ProductivityCast &#8211; Subjective versus Objective Time</strong> from this episode, please <a href="#reply-title">click here to leave a comment</a> down below (this jumps you to the bottom of the post).</p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">In this Cast | ProductivityCast &#8211; Subjective versus Objective Time</h2> <p><a href="http://productivitycast.net/about/">Ray Sidney-Smith</a></p> <p><a href="http://productivitycast.net/about/">Augusto Pinaud</a></p> <p><a href="http://productivitycast.net/about/">Art Gelwicks</a></p> <p><a href="https://productivitycast.net/about/">Francis Wade</a></p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">Show Notes | ProductivityCast &#8211; Subjective versus Objective Time</h2> <p><em>Resources we mention, including links to them, will be provided here. Please listen to the episode for context.</em></p> <ul class="wp-block-list"> <li><a href="https://medium.com/2time-labs/is-time-management-really-real-or-is-it-just-a-misnomer-8bdf77c2390f">Is Time Management Really “Real”, Or Is It Just a Misnomer? | by Francis Wade | 2Time Labs | Medium</a></li> <li><a href="https://www.webmd.com/mental-health/what-is-a-victim-mentality">Victim Mentality: Causes, Symptoms, and More</a></li> <li><a href="https://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/amr.2017.0384">The Impact of Temporal Schemata: Understanding When Individuals Entrain Versus Resist or Create Temporal Structure | Academy of Management Review</a>&nbsp;</li> <li><a href="https://www.iwillteachyoutoberich.com/">Ramit Sethi</a></li> <li><a href="https://www.r-project.org/">The R Project for Statistical Computing</a>&nbsp;</li> </ul> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">Raw Text Transcript | ProductivityCast &#8211; Subjective versus Objective Time</h2> <p><em>Raw, unedited and machine-produced text transcript so there may be substantial errors, but you can search for specific points in the episode to jump to, or to reference back to at a later date and time, by keywords or key phrases. The time coding is mm:ss (e.g., 0:04 starts at 4 seconds into the cast’s audio).</em></p> <span><a onclick="read_toggle(771580113, '', ''); return false;" class="read-link" id="readlink771580113" style="readlink" href="#"></a></span> <div class="read_div" id="read771580113" style="display: none;"></p> <p>Voiceover Artist 0:00<br>Are you ready to manage your work and personal world better to live a fulfilling productive life, then you&#8217;ve come to the right place. ProductivityCast the weekly show about all things productivity, here are your hosts, Ray Sidney-Smith and Augusto Pinaud with Francis Wade and Art Gelwicks.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 0:17<br>Welcome back, everybody to ProductivityCast, the weekly show about all things personal productivity. I&#8217;m Ray Sidney-Smith.</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 0:23<br>I&#8217;m Augusto Pinaud.</p> <p>Francis Wade 0:24<br>I&#8217;m Francis Wade.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 0:25<br>And I&#8217;m Art Gelwicks.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 0:26<br>Welcome, gentlemen, and welcome to ProductivityCast. Welcome to our listeners. Today, we are going to be talking about objective versus subjective time. And we will be trying to objectively thinking about whether or not it actually even exists. So, for instance, do you want to open this up with regard to this article. So basically, this is an article from hbr.org. And actually, Brian Clark in personal productivity club had brought this to my attention. And the article is my fixation on time management almost broke me by Abby J. Ship. She is a PhD researcher at Texas Christian University. And she has a PhD in organizational behavior from University of North Carolina. And so her research focuses on the subjective and psychological experience of time, including what she&#8217;s quoting here as the trajectories of work experiences fit satisfaction and burnout, for example, and the nature of mental time travel and attention, and how individual views of time impact performance, well being and coordination in organizations. And so very interesting area of research that she does. Francis, can you open us up in terms of what Dr. Ship talks about? In this article?</p> <p>Francis Wade 1:36<br>The topic of the article is my fixation on time management almost broke me. So it&#8217;s a bit click Beatty, in the sense that you&#8217;re thinking that she&#8217;s talking about what everyone is talking about the respect to time management. But those of us who are in the know, you know, that you probably would want to what version of time management is she talking about? And how did it break her. So just in the way this article starts, I&#8217;m just gonna talk about the start for a moment. She&#8217;s define time management in a particular way. She&#8217;s claimed that the way that she relates to time management broke her. And she&#8217;s, in a way blaming time management. And I think there&#8217;s huge problems just with that she gets them to other more realistic things in the latter part of the article, but the context of it, I don&#8217;t know if the, you know, you write articles, and then the editor decides what&#8217;s the sexy part that will draw people in? Well, the sexy part that drew people in through the title is just way off base. And why well, I wrote an article can time be managed, and really looked at whether or not this is a reality or a construct in language. And I came away with the latter. So for her to go this far down the road without defining time management is a huge problem for those of us who care, both definitions like this and why they matter.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 3:02<br>Yeah. So I think about this from the perspective that what she&#8217;s really saying is that because she became hyperbolic with regard to her own use of time management methods, right? She she basically had this obtuse view that she could do more and more and more not hitting upper limit, and or have unhealthy behavioral interventions, and then presume that those are time management. I just, this is where I have I struggled with her lead up to it, which is that there is this sense, and I think it&#8217;s an unhealthy sense that many of us have, and I don&#8217;t think she&#8217;s out of the ordinary here. I think there there are other folks who are highly productivity minded, ourselves included, who get to a point, and we feel productive, and we think, well, we can be more productive, we could do, we could do that much more, and then it becomes unhealthy. And that actually drives us to spend more time on trying to iron out these small inefficiencies potentially, or small in effectiveness components of our world. And that ends up spending more time and being more deleterious to our outcomes and to our health and not so I get that I understand the argument, but that is not because of the time management methods themselves. That is a that is a psychological behavioral component, not an issue of the methodologies or the technologies themselves. Anyone else agree or disagree?</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 4:33<br>But should the methodologies take that into consideration? No,</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 4:37<br>I don&#8217;t think so. Like okay, so Jerry Seinfeld is supposed to be the progenitor of the don&#8217;t break the chain, time management methodology, where you cross off the items on the calendar in a mechanism to chain together and therefore create momentum around getting something done. Why is it his responsibility to then take into account all of the various psychological capabilities that we have and limitations that we have, when it comes to this, when, in reality, he just proffered what he does. He didn&#8217;t say, there&#8217;s some great psychological underpinning here, he didn&#8217;t say there was some great, you know, amount of, of, you know, grand, whatever. He just basically said, This is what I do, it works for me. And it was taken and run with it. You know, and many other people have now talked about it about him, because he&#8217;s a famous comedian, and so on and so forth. So like, I just don&#8217;t see the the opportunity there for him to have given this underpinning, you know, he didn&#8217;t write a book about it, he didn&#8217;t do anything. But you know, what, don&#8217;t break the chain helps. How many 1000s of people every year, get things done?</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 5:44<br>Is there any reason to not do it, though? I mean, if you have the opportunity to take consideration of the subjective parts of how you&#8217;re executing your productivity into consideration and compensate for them adjust or at least be prepared for them, does that not inherently make a better system for yourself? I mean, I think about things like you know, when you have something on your list that you&#8217;re going to do, and you know, it&#8217;s going to take you two, three hours to do it. And it&#8217;s something you hate to do. You know, it&#8217;s going to feel like it takes forever to get that completed. Well, that&#8217;s perception. It has nothing to do with how long it actually takes it to get done. But it might, because if you don&#8217;t want to do it, who says you&#8217;re going to do it at your maximum speed, your maximum level of productivity, the odds are extremely good, you&#8217;re not. So failing to take that into consideration, at least personally, sets us up in situations where I can understand the struggle that she&#8217;s talking about. I don&#8217;t agree with everything in the article, but I do understand the concept and the struggle that she&#8217;s talking about. Where&#8217;s the cap? I mean, we started talking about that at the beginning. Where&#8217;s the top end of productivity? If I feel like I&#8217;m hitting? No, I&#8217;m hitting everything on my task list. And I&#8217;m getting my stuff done. And my projects are getting turned in? Should I stop there? Time management methodologies and productivity, you know? Everybody running around right now will go well, no, you need to work harder. You need to work harder, you can work harder, you&#8217;re getting everything done. That means you can do more. And I can understand why that would break somebody. I can totally get that. Because there is no sense as to where does this thing go off the rails? And without that taken into consideration? Yeah, there isn&#8217;t a methodology out there that says you&#8217;ve done enough stop. If there is, I don&#8217;t know about it. I&#8217;d love to hear it if there is but I don&#8217;t know of one that says, Yeah, you&#8217;re good.</p> <p>Unknown Speaker 7:55<br>And I don&#8217;t think I agree with you there. I don&#8217;t think there is one and it is an issue that you find into a lot of people, okay? Where, and I found that especially in people who</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 8:13<br>chlorin to extremes, okay, who they are beginning to personal productivity, okay. And then now they went from this disorganization mode to a more structure one, okay. And they start building their system, and they&#8217;re now getting some stuff, and are okay, I&#8217;m so ineffective. And then I see it on the other extreme, okay, people who has been traditionally, you know, really organized and effective and productive, and then suddenly wants to raise the bar, and then they feel that they&#8217;re not, and it&#8217;s not that they are not, if you objectively compare apples to apples, with their own productivity, do you see how they&#8217;re being more effective, but the problem is, you lose, what is out of the possibilities, the real possibility is 24 hours, how many hours are you sleeping? How many hours are you working? How many hours are you taking self care? And then how many hours are you really working? Okay, because if your list, we look at your list, and we analyze all those tasks and it says you have 96 hours to accomplish those things. Okay, the day is still going to have 24 hours, okay? There is only one feeling at the end of the day failure. And it&#8217;s a problem with productivity. No, it is a problem that we tend to start taking and taking and taking it because we can process them. We begin to feel that we are invincible that we can take whatever it takes. And at some point we miss into go into calibration said that isn&#8217;t the problem is not that I have this 1000 things on my system. It&#8217;s I still have 24 hours. So I need to or hire people so I can get 96 desk To download a war, I need to work into my system. So I can only have X amount of hours a day that include sleeping, self care, and many other things. And then what are the number of hours that I&#8217;m going to work? Because otherwise, yeah, you get exactly into what this article describes. The system will kill you, if you just go from another tick. Okay, the ticking will eventually killed you. But it kills you because we tend to forget, where are those hours? And where are those real possibilities. And by the way, I&#8217;m guilty as charged</p> <p>Francis Wade 10:40<br>with what&#8217;s behind what you&#8217;re seeing. Gousto is a sense of being responsible for your actions. The first part of this article makes it sound as if time management did it to her. Like there&#8217;s this thing out there that came in and did this thing to me. But the truth and the fact that when you get past the fact that there is she doesn&#8217;t define time management and tank can&#8217;t be managed. And time management is only a psychological object. It&#8217;s not a physical object, like walking in arena and getting wet. Psychological objects can always be reinterpreted, wherever, whichever way we want. And that&#8217;s what she&#8217;s done. She&#8217;s according to rage. She&#8217;s taking this hyperbolic definition, set it up as the boogeyman and said look at the boogeyman did it to me, this is the first part of the article. I&#8217;m just saying she did this. And I agree people can do this all day long. But you can do with anything you can you could say, look at marriage that to me, Weren&#8217;t you there in the marriage at some point? No did it to me. There is nothing out there. When it comes to psychological objects that don&#8217;t do things to us. We&#8217;re the ones who define them. And if we define them, well, we get the benefits of it, find them poorly, we suffer. But we&#8217;re the ones doing it. It&#8217;s not it happening to us. But I think her realization later on in the article was that her she didn&#8217;t say it this way. But her definition was wrong. And she didn&#8217;t actually say that throughout the whole article. But she at least added to her understanding and said, we&#8217;ll get into it the second part of the article, but the first part and the clickbait clickbait comes from this weird place that if you start just start to read it, you&#8217;re like what time management did something there or poor thing,</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 12:25<br>I&#8217;m going to put a link to this folks in the show notes, which is a WebMD article on victim mentality. And, you know, the the beginning of the article really does structure around this. And she prefaces it that way, on purpose, I think for a goal of being able to draw the reader in. And so I think I think this was I don&#8217;t know if it&#8217;s purposeful, but I think she did, she did put this in that perspective. And I think it&#8217;s helpful just for people just to kind of understand where she&#8217;s coming from, in that perspective, art go for it,</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 12:55<br>I&#8217;m gonna flat out disagree with you there, the victim mentality thing is a bad excuse. Don&#8217;t use that as a standing point. Don&#8217;t use that as an argument, because it&#8217;s not victim mentality. If you go through and you look at all these methodologies that are pushed and promoted, and everything I&#8217;ll take, you know, GTD is a perfect example, if you&#8217;re not working at your maximum volume, you&#8217;re not productive. And that is the message that is continually delivered. You look at productivity, anywhere on like, tick tock, Instagram, anything like that. That&#8217;s the message, how many posts have you seen around productivity hacks, that you&#8217;re not if you don&#8217;t do this, you&#8217;re not being productive enough, you&#8217;re not getting enough out of your day, you&#8217;re not being a good enough person. That&#8217;s that reinforcement that is that constant message that has been pounded on people. So even if you start down that path, no matter how far down that path, you&#8217;re not far enough, yet. That&#8217;s the message. So if we say that people are taking this from a victim mindset, I&#8217;m sorry, they&#8217;re not they&#8217;re getting abused by the system half of the time. Because no matter how far down the process, you go, you&#8217;re not far enough, yet, you will never be productive enough. I challenge you to look at half of the posts out there and tell me which one will tell you where you&#8217;re going to be productive enough, you are now successful,</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 14:12<br>we definitely have popular literature and popular discussions on the blogosphere and whatnot, that do push this notion that you have to do more, be more, otherwise, you&#8217;re not good enough. I don&#8217;t take that too. Again, anything related to the time management methodologies themselves. This is a this is a problem with society and culture. I mean, the idea that we have workaholism that we have any of those things is not because a time management method was created. We could potentially blame that on the industrial agent and the concept that humans are widgets, or widget creators, and if we if we mechanize we continue to think about humans as being machines. And we talk about our brains as computers and so on and so forth. Right these, this this notion that somehow we are not biological creatures is that we&#8217;re not animals, in essence that are meant to have rest and meant to have leisurely lives or those kinds of things, right? We just, we divorce those pieces. And then we presume that we should just basically turn every ounce out of people in terms of energy. It&#8217;s up to us, and it&#8217;s wrong. But But conceding that point, the article still does preface this as being, you know, somehow the methodologies fault. And I think that&#8217;s where I make the clear dividing line. And I</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 15:31<br>go back to my basic point, show me one methodology, just one that tells me I was productive today that I was successfully productive today. I have yet to find what if you can tell me where in what methodology I can sit down at the end of the day, and the methodology will tell me yes, you were productive today. There&#8217;s nothing objective to that. That is your subjective assessment. And if she is subjectively saying that these time management methodologies failed me, because I never felt like I was being productive. That&#8217;s I&#8217;m not going to fault the methodologies for not taking that in consideration. But I&#8217;m saying this is a real thing. This is the reason why we have this entire freaking industry. Because if this was not the case, everybody just pick a methodology and chug right through. But it&#8217;s the people part of the equation.</p> <p>Francis Wade 16:27<br>I tell them to their art a little bit, because if he said that we wouldn&#8217;t be having this discussion, because she didn&#8217;t actually say what you said, I wish she did it, because then we could say, oh, empirically, she tried this methodology, A, B, and C, and it failed. And it didn&#8217;t work for her. But she&#8217;s going way beyond that. And as Ray said, being hyperbolic, and saying, time management did something to me this. And she didn&#8217;t name any methodology, she basically said, my way of trying to manage my time, should even say that she said it time management did something over here to me. Like she separated herself from her own practices, label the practices and call them time management and said, time management did it to me, that&#8217;s a little bit like some people I know who blame their blame David Allen, for all these things that David Allen never said, doesn&#8217;t propose. David Allen wants you to have peace of mind at the end of the day. And that&#8217;s what he really wants. That&#8217;s a whole point of his book. But I&#8217;ve seen people critique his book and say, Oh, you&#8217;re telling us to do this. And if we&#8217;re not doing that, and we&#8217;re not doing that, but that&#8217;s not what he said. That&#8217;s not what this methodology is about. And she, she loves everything together and says, time management did it to me, and she&#8217;s not talking methodologies. If she were, we&#8217;d have to be having a different conversation. But that&#8217;s</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 17:47<br>okay. I mean, let&#8217;s be realistic. Let&#8217;s be realistic about it. If she were to pick out a specific methodology and say this one didn&#8217;t work for me, what would be the general community reaction, you chose wrong methodology that doesn&#8217;t move the marker that doesn&#8217;t open this discussion up. Not one person listening to this podcast, or even on this podcast, has not been frustrated with a methodology at some point in time. Every methodology we&#8217;ve all gone through, at some point in time has frustrated us. It is annoyed us it has made us look at alternatives. So yes, making the blanket statement that time management failed me and did something to me. I&#8217;ll make the argument. Time management methodologies opened my eyes to the realization that there isn&#8217;t a Maillot methodology out there that works,</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 18:38<br>good to bring a parallel to this, okay. And I&#8217;m going to bring this trend that we have into minimalism and reducing and frugality and reducing the expense. Okay, I&#8217;m going to bring that for a second, okay? And you read all this, okay? And you are going to find the same thing. Okay. The people who find and I have found one person who talks about a concept is names from it&#8217;s at the ends Ramit talks about conscious spending instead. And what he said is do is you basically reduce, you know, mercilessly, everything that you don&#8217;t care for and you maximize expense and fun into what you care for. Okay, that by the way, as I forgot the minimalist concept, it&#8217;s much better. Again, you get rid of basically a reduced expenses and anything that doesn&#8217;t bring anything to your life and so you can have really fun and the other thing, productivity is not a lot different than this. The problem is, we are focusing this in the wrong things because we want to have everything okay. When you come and make a statement like time management fail me, okay? is the equivalent to have now two shirts and say, Well, I wanted to have a party, but I don&#8217;t have anything to wear. Well, yes, of course you have nothing to wear. You now have two shirts you You sell everything on your house, you have an empty house and a shirt. Yes. You have nothing to wear that that&#8217;s what you did. It&#8217;s no different than this. And it&#8217;s no different than in productivity. What is what you want to be productive about it? I&#8217;m sorry. I&#8217;ve been coaching people now for a while. Okay, I just want to find one person that when I asked this question, what do you want to be productive? For? They have an answer. By the way, that&#8217;s one of the things we work on. Okay. Because if you tell me right now, well, what if you don&#8217;t know what you want to be productive? Sorry, CS Lewis said any you don&#8217;t know where you&#8217;re going? any road will do? That&#8217;s the reality was productivity. If you don&#8217;t know, why do you want to be more productive for you are always going to find something that is going to need you more productive, and just that&#8217;s going to break you and just that&#8217;s going to make you miserable? And yes, you are never going to find that answer of I did well. And that&#8217;s close for this sideline of minimalism and frugality before we lost people in in the panel, and not the listeners in the panel,</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 21:09<br>I will make no comments on the topic of minimalism, darkness this episode, here&#8217;s</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 21:15<br>a corollary that I don&#8217;t know if that&#8217;s the right word or not. But here&#8217;s something I want to tie into here. The statement that time management has no direct relationship with productivity. You can be have highly managed time and be very unproductive. And you can be very productive and not have a time structure. I&#8217;ll make that argument. Because I did it yesterday, I had a very productive day, got everything done that I wanted to do. I didn&#8217;t plan the timeout timeout for anything, I had my checklist of things to get done. But they took as much time as they did. And I was able to progress through them and execute and get everything finished. So there is no direct causality there between managing my time and a productive result. One does help the other,</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 22:17<br>you can&#8217;t bifurcate the universe from the laws of physics, right?</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 22:23<br>But why not? What what is preventing me from doing that? The only piece I took out of that conversation was how long each item would take.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 22:31<br>Right? Right. But you have all kinds of things going on unconsciously, you have the course of a day, you can&#8217;t say the sun rising in the sun setting are not aspects of your understanding of both time and, and space time. And those kinds of things, right? We&#8217;re always aware of those things. It&#8217;s like an artist who will say like, I can&#8217;t be bounded by, you know, structure in order to do my art, right? The reality is you still have to be bound by the laws of physics, by by gravity, you know, you have you have structure, even when you are not aware of that structure.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 23:05<br>So it&#8217;s based on my subjective interpretation of my productivity and progress during the course of the day is it not? Sounds like what this article is talking about,</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 23:15<br>but use the argument of the artist, right? If they were a data just right, or an impressionist, that has no bearing, like the concept of impressionism is a is a is a fact and interpretive fact. Right? We know what what impressionism is, and the artist is saying, I can&#8217;t paint like an impressionist because of my because of of gravity. That&#8217;s, that&#8217;s, you know, like, patently false, right? We know that there are people who are using impressionistic art in modern times and paint Impressionist paintings to say that gravity is, is somehow impacting their ability to create an objective, impressionistic art piece is false. We know that empirically. Right. So like, that&#8217;s, that&#8217;s what I&#8217;m hearing in terms of the right analogy, and maybe I&#8217;m getting it wrong. But what I&#8217;m hearing you say, though, is that you can step away from time management, methodology and time management practices. And by virtue of having learned those skills, you don&#8217;t need all of those things to the letter of the law of that particular or to the canon of that in order to be productive, in order to be productive.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 24:28<br>Let me give you a different analogy for it. To me, it&#8217;s the difference between training for a marathon and going out for a jog. The objective is the same. Now one is more complex than the other. You have training for a marathon big deal, and all kinds of work to do all kinds of planning to do you know, over multiple periods, going out for a jog or going out for a jog. But I don&#8217;t apply the same time management construct and same artificial constructs around going out for a jog But yet, once I do that jog, once I go out for that little run, I feel like I was productive. That&#8217;s what I wanted to do. And I did it. So we get into this, this construct of building these rule sets. And then we feel like everything has to go into those rule sets. Same thing happens with our tools, we get one of these tools or multiple tools, and then everything&#8217;s got to go into that tool. And it&#8217;s got to hold all these structures, and it&#8217;s got to be able to deal with all these permutations is like, snow, it doesn&#8217;t, it doesn&#8217;t have to, it doesn&#8217;t have to be big and scary. Sometimes things can be little, they can be posted notes and pins. They don&#8217;t have to be new notion in Salesforce.</p> <p>Francis Wade 25:43<br>But I think this is this is the point we&#8217;re making. That is the definition of there&#8217;s a definitional basis problem at the basic of basic of a term like time management, or jogging. It depends on how you define time management. So the way you define time management is that when I made my to do list yesterday, I didn&#8217;t use time management. However, every time management book has a part on making lists and following them throughout the day. So everyone, most people define time management to include the activity that you that you defined time management separate from the productivity that you&#8217;ve had yesterday, which I think is useful. It&#8217;s just that your definition is the popular one. And she didn&#8217;t define what she meant by time management, except to say that here&#8217;s a bunch of hyperbolic things I was doing. And I&#8217;m not calling that time management and under I&#8217;m making that the boogeyman and I&#8217;m saying that that that, to me, is an order of articles that I&#8217;ve read, which say that time management is no good. And they always start with a definition of time management that is peculiar to the individual. Let&#8217;s say that. So they build the boogeyman up, they tear it down, and they say, therefore, time management doesn&#8217;t work, or therefore I should do energy management, therefore, you should focus on your feelings instead, therefore, you should, but it&#8217;s all a definitional problem. And when there is no clear definition, or in as I would argue, in my paper, can time be managed, when you can&#8217;t define it. Because time management cannot be managed because it doesn&#8217;t exist, then we&#8217;re all talking, we&#8217;re think we&#8217;re talking about the same thing. And we&#8217;re not, which is the point that remain. And I think the example that you gave is true, you know, run out and run 10 marathons. And to say that a marathon is equivalent to jogging can only be true if you&#8217;re defining true, the aspects that are dissimilar in a peculiar way, because there&#8217;s a million ways in which they&#8217;re very different. So it depends on how you define it. And if you define it rigorously, then we can have a conversation. Otherwise, we have to go back to the definition and say, what do we mean by the term, because we&#8217;re then just comparing apples to oranges. And I think that&#8217;s a huge problem. In our field of productivity,</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 27:52<br>especially when in productivity, we have very few places where terminology actually is defined, if I say to you, time blocking time, chunking time stacking, or habit stacking many of these terms are, are defined by an individual, and they are not generalizable. And so therefore, you know, we&#8217;re not really capable of saying everybody defines this term this particular way. And that&#8217;s a topic for another podcast for another day. But moving along to this secondary notion in the article now, which is subjective versus objective time, what she&#8217;s what I&#8217;m hearing her say, and correct me if I&#8217;m, if I&#8217;m misinterpreting her. She&#8217;s talking about subjective time as our interpretation of time time, of course, being something that is a measurement of quantitative measurement. What I&#8217;m seeing when I&#8217;m reading, what she writes, is that there is a subjective interpretation of of time. And we need to take that into account as it relates to how we deal with our productive days</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 28:57<br>that I agree with completely. I think that is dead on and we&#8217;ve all experienced it, at some point in time, you&#8217;ve been doing something that you really enjoy, and all of a sudden the clock has zoomed past, you know, you allotted two hours for this. And also in the two hours are up, it&#8217;s like wait, but I was having fun. I was making progress. I feel like I was doing well. I want to do more time, or the flip side of the coin, where it feels like it&#8217;s taking for ever. You&#8217;ve ever sat through a staff meeting, you know what that&#8217;s like, so that, that perception is extremely true. It&#8217;s It&#8217;s proven out through psychological studies and analyses. How we take that into consideration, though, is a very personal thing in my mind. We have to, we have to be very introspective as to how we view different types of things that we are going to do. aren&#8217;t that good things to us? Are they bad things to us? Are they boring things? Are they exciting things and be able to take that into consideration? If I think about you Here&#8217;s things that I enjoy doing, it makes sense to me to expand the amount of time that I&#8217;m going to allocate to do them. If for no other reason that I get more personal satisfaction out of doing them during that time period, and if there&#8217;s things I don&#8217;t like, well, I want to condense that time down and make sure that I&#8217;m as streamlined as possible to get it done and over with. So I agree completely. I think subjective time is a core driver to a lot of this stuff. And I think that&#8217;s where a lot of methodologies struggle is allowing people that opportunity to work there subjectiveness into the objective measures that are in the system.</p> <p>Francis Wade 30:41<br>And the object, the the so called objective measures. According to the physics, they aren&#8217;t even objective. Because time, time is a human construct. It&#8217;s a way of measuring change. And if our listeners have heard of the twin paradox, if you take a couple of twins, put one into orbit for a long enough time and leave the other one here on earth, when you bring them back together, one will be older than the other. Because time has passed differently at the two extremes. So even the physics says that time is subjective. So it&#8217;s it&#8217;s all if it&#8217;s all made up, then we might as well play with it the way art is the way art is saying we might as well say, Okay, well, there&#8217;s a 1999, and y2k, we thought it was gonna be the end of the world. And it was very limited a problem. But it&#8217;s a it was a global made up problem, because we all made up that this was 1999. And that there was going to be a turnover of the clock that was going to cause a problem, which was true in the software. But there&#8217;s no objective reality that that was the year 2000, that was all a human construct. It was all made up, we could have all agreed to let&#8217;s let&#8217;s dial it back another 100, a few 100 years if we could have changed a time to any point in time that we wanted to. And there&#8217;s some societies, some tribes that exists today that don&#8217;t measure time. They don&#8217;t they don&#8217;t have that they don&#8217;t have constructs around time. And we&#8217;re taught what time is, as kids, we get to age eight, somebody teaches us what a clock is. And before that, we will know that in Teach us we will have no clue. So it&#8217;s all subjective. So the idea of playing with our subjectivity, and not accepting the that its objective in any way. If it&#8217;s all subjective, then we get to play with every aspect of it, including even hard commitments. I think she she mentioned this when somebody, you&#8217;ve made a hard commitment to do something hard. Hard doesn&#8217;t. Not even 9099 y2k problem was hard. It was just global. But it wasn&#8217;t hard in the sense that, you know, I take a rock and hit you in the head, that&#8217;s hard. Because that&#8217;s a physical reality. She&#8217;s talking about psychological, psychological experiences, some of which are based in global agreement. But those aren&#8217;t hard. And I think she&#8217;s right about that, then there is no hard deadline, hard deadline, no really hard deadline,</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 33:17<br>you got hard with a capital H, you know, ones that the world&#8217;s going to end kind of thing. And then there are ones that everybody has to deal with. I&#8217;ll take in the corporate space, for example, you&#8217;re talking about getting something done in the next thing, that manager supervisor, person of authority, turns around and says, Oh, and you can have that done tomorrow, right? That becomes an artificially constructed deadline. It has nothing to do with the quality of the work, the delivery, the execution, none of that. It is just something that was picked for some abstract reason. But now, all of a sudden, time management kicks in, oh, I have eight hours between now and then how can I fit all this in? How can I get more out of this limited, abstract artificial block of intervals. And that&#8217;s where I think these things start to deconstruct and we have to in the productivity space, we have to start peeling that away. We have to get away from this idea of we just can&#8217;t think about everything measured in 15 minute increments anymore. We have to think about the quality of it. We have to think about the mental impact on the people doing the work. We have to think about the impact on the organizations and we have to think about the work itself. Is it worth even doing?</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 34:42<br>So the author brings up this new term called temporal schemata. And what she talks about here in the research that&#8217;s linked to it, she links to an article that she&#8217;s a co author of with Dr. Hedy a Richardson and the study is called the The impact of temporal schemata understanding when individuals and train versus resist or create temporal structure, and she defines the idea of temporal schemata as basically, quote, unquote, time rules, quoting here, again, fixed views of when things should occur or how long they should last, in the abstract of the research. She called these cognitive frameworks about time. And I find this fascinating, just in general, because it puts a term to something like the fact that she mentions in the article as an example, that meetings should be 30 minutes or 60 minutes long in length. Just as a general rule, we see that because we have calendar tools, that when we place a calendar item in the calendar will typically choose something of an hour&#8217;s length, and then when we shrink it to a shorter period of time, we typically will choose a 30 minute increment as being the length of those meetings, purely because the software gives us those options, not because of of reality, and that has created an organizational behaviors, that culture just dictates that meetings are 30 minutes, 60 minutes, 90 minutes, two hours, those kinds of things. And of course, we need to resist just because something needs to be a shorter amount of time, that it should only be 30 minutes. And so therefore there&#8217;s this by layer situation here, which is not just our subjective view of time, but also our subjective view of these temporal schemata. We need to we need to look at time rules within an organization and, and look at them with skepticism, look at them with critical eye so that we can say, Hey, do why should this meeting? Why isn&#8217;t the meeting 12 minutes long, right. And that way, we can then go ahead and say, if we only need so much time for something, that&#8217;s a lot the appropriate time to it, and right, match that with the right people so that we&#8217;re not actually wasting other people&#8217;s time. And we&#8217;re not wasting our own. So I feel like there&#8217;s some really strong argument in the article. Notwithstanding the preface kind of context of the article itself, I find that piece itself to be very, very useful. Any other thoughts related to the subjective, or the interpretive mind as it relates to, if we know that time is time, I mean, at least here on Earth at sea level, time is the same, right? Because if we do do increase elevation, time does dilate, right? Time dilation is real. But here on sea level, where we are, for the most part, time is the same. And we want to be able to manage time effectively. I&#8217;m a heavy Time Tracker. I&#8217;m also I&#8217;m a quantified self, or I track a lot of data about myself. And so I consider time to be an objective construct, notwithstanding how I perceive what I do in that time. So I purposefully understand and track my time to see how those things differ. So that I can come to some central view on how it is that I spent my time. What do you all do in order to be able to be more effective in the face of the fact that time? Is that ever marching road ahead,</p> <p>Francis Wade 38:12<br>I track my time as well. I wish I had better tools to analyze the data that I&#8217;ve collected. But as a reflective tool, I find it very useful to look back and actually compare what I spent my time on versus what I think I spent my time on or what I intended. So I find that to be to be really useful. Also,</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 38:33<br>I&#8217;ve spent my entire career measuring my Time and Billing for my time. And I&#8217;ve come to the realization that I need to spend less time focusing on how much I can get done during a billable hour. And what does it take to get the work done? That, to me is the linchpin of the entire conversation when when I look at this, and when I talk to anybody about this, when they lay out, what am I what am I going to do to be productive? I&#8217;m like, Well, how are you going to know when you were productive? What&#8217;s the end line? What&#8217;s the goal line? Then figure out? What&#8217;s it gonna take to be able to reach that, but don&#8217;t say, you know, what can I do to be productive in the next two hours? It&#8217;s, it&#8217;s the wrong perspective. It&#8217;s the wrong way of looking at, it&#8217;s creating an artificial stress that&#8217;s unnecessary.</p> <p>Francis Wade 39:24<br>I don&#8217;t know if I agree with that are in that, I think there is value to when you may have a real deadline. So last week, I put on a virtual conference with some very real deadlines. And I had a as you can imagine, it was a massive project with lots of people 1000 people showing up in a particular space because I invited them to be there and implicitly, I promised that everything would be in place for them to be there. You know, having having accepted that and having also committed that and not burnt out in the process. And that those of us who are putting it on would actually enjoy the experience. So committing to that, as well as the hard data, the soft, hard data that we had published. The question then became, which things do we do? In what sequence? And how do we make sure that they get done, because they had to get done in order to accomplish the overall objective? That requires the kind of optimization that you&#8217;re talking about? I think what you&#8217;re seeing is that that optimization can&#8217;t overtake the overall objective, because by itself, optimizing how you create your schedule, or your the schedules that you create means nothing if the larger context isn&#8217;t very, very firm, or very, very clear. So that&#8217;s what I hear you saying?</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 40:51<br>Well, no, and I agree with you. And I think we&#8217;re dancing, we&#8217;re both answering around the same point, because you didn&#8217;t say, can I put this conference together in 40 hours, that wasn&#8217;t your definition, you had a hard date, and you planned out to reach that date that milestone, if it took you 10 hours, if it took you 60 hours, you were still going to do the work necessary to to achieve that end goal, at the high level of quality that you wanted to deliver. At that point, you would say I was productive. Now, part of that measure may have been to do it in as few hours as possible. So you have time for other things and other activities. And that&#8217;s completely valid.</p> <p>Francis Wade 41:32<br>But there was a, there was more to it, though, because another angle of it is there were features I had to take out. Because there was not enough time to fit them in. So there&#8217;s there&#8217;s also that so I had to add to say no to a bunch of cool stuff. Because I just couldn&#8217;t, couldn&#8217;t fit it in so that there was a hard there was a hard reality in there that I couldn&#8217;t do everything I wanted to do. So I had to make choices and say, Well, you know what, maybe next year, I&#8217;d have I could do that. But again, in the overall context. So not burning out having this be fun, having it be peaceful, having that be injurious to or lifestyle and food and well being and</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 42:12<br>so that the difference is that I that I hear is that next year when you do this, you want to do the cool things. So you&#8217;re going to allocate more time to be able to do that. Or you&#8217;re going to decide, I&#8217;m not going to do those at all. It&#8217;s not that you&#8217;re going to try and figure out how to cram the cool things into the same amount of time, you&#8217;re going to take the historical data, you&#8217;re going to take your subjective analysis as to how you felt about that execution and having to leave those these pieces out. And you&#8217;re going to adjust accordingly.</p> <p>Francis Wade 42:43<br>No, I&#8217;m going to ask that question. Because here&#8217;s what I&#8217;m going to do. I&#8217;ve already decided this. Interestingly, so the cool thing is in, I&#8217;m going to, here&#8217;s my strategy, I&#8217;m gonna have to start earlier, and developing some of them, I&#8217;m gonna have to outsource, like, for example, the graphics because I do all the graphics right now I tried outsourcing it this year, didn&#8217;t find someone who use the tools that I wanted to use, and then gave up. But I would try, I would start earlier to find someone who has the skills. So that we am so outsourcing and starting early are my two strategies for getting in more of the cool things. So in a way I am doing what you&#8217;re doing. It&#8217;s just that with more runaway, I can have more options. I can have more choices, strategies that I can put in play,</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 43:29<br>I think I&#8217;m going to agree with and beat the dead horse. But if you don&#8217;t, I&#8217;m just going to quote CS Lewis, if you don&#8217;t know where you want to go, any road will do. And that applies to productivity 100% If you don&#8217;t know what you want to do, what is the kind of productivity that you want to have? What is the time that you need for self care? And how do those things, and those little elements are important in your life, you are never going to win that race. There is always one check, you can do one extra check you can do and you don&#8217;t know what you&#8217;re looking for. It doesn&#8217;t matter how many things you can accomplish on that list.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 44:12<br>For me, it&#8217;s it&#8217;s pretty straightforward. Make the time part of your equation, the last piece, answer every other question, What am I doing? Why am I doing it? What&#8217;s the benefit? What&#8217;s the personal satisfaction, answer all of those questions, and then go back and say, what&#8217;s the time it&#8217;s going to is it going to take for me to hit all those markers. If you don&#8217;t do that. You&#8217;re just asking for stress.</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 44:35<br>Yeah, I actually simplify a version of that and I said plan first, for your recovery time for your free time for your vacation time. Then plan how you&#8217;re going to protect that time and what you have leftover. Then use it for that. When you plan that way that is contrary of how most people play plan. You are You&#8217;re going to find a lot more satisfaction,</p> <p>Francis Wade 45:02<br>it takes a certain kind of emotional maturity to put your experience before the mechanics. But I think you guys are right, if if you have the discipline to do it, and the discipline to not forget what you&#8217;re doing, then the time aspect of it is really just kind of, in a way, don&#8217;t in the weeds, it&#8217;s important. But by the time you get to that, if you&#8217;ve already put the others in place, then you will achieve the experience that you want. And ultimately, we want the experience, not just the time optimization, because what does that add up to anyway, in the end, right, so</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 45:39<br>I&#8217;ll leave us with this, which is the fact that contrary to the to the author of the article, Dr. Ship notes, her views on time management don&#8217;t actually reject her notion that she wants to be productive. Clearly, she has an interest in being productive, as we all do. And we wouldn&#8217;t be recording this podcast on this panel. And you wouldn&#8217;t be listening to us as listeners, if you didn&#8217;t have interest in your own personal productivity. The goal here then is to figure out how what we are doing impacts what we can do better. And I just ultimately always have landed on the idea that active and passive tracking of time is the best way for us to do that. Our perception of what we are doing is very different than when we track data empirically, and review that reflect upon that. So while what you guys talked about in planning for how we spend our time, we also need to be understanding of the immutability of time, and therefore, figuring out what it is we did so that we can optimize for the future. Past performance, usually begets future performance. And so therefore, if we can change what we&#8217;ve done in the past, and just small ways, we can be more productive. And so I just highly recommend that people think how to track time how to manage the process of figuring out what it is we did, and why did we do it that way? And can we do it a little bit better. And it&#8217;s not about grand changes. It&#8217;s these small little incremental changes that really have the most profound impacts on our health and well being, and ultimately, our personal productivity. And so I want to thank you, gentlemen, for the conversation. Thank you all for listening to us, we have a couple of just points before we close out. First and foremost, while this conversation is at its end, we don&#8217;t have to end it necessarily here just in the audio, we can even extend it into the conversation that happens not only on the podcast episode page on productivitycast.net, but we also have our community inside personal productivity clubs, you can join that by heading over to productivitycast.net. And you&#8217;ll find the community link there and you can join us and engage in the conversation, we&#8217;d love to have you engage in the conversation with us. Also, while you&#8217;re on the episode page on productivitycast.net, you&#8217;ll find our show notes, those have links to the various things we discussed here today. And so there you can link out to them and find all those resources there. We also include text transcripts in both a readable format on the page, and one which you can download as a PDF. So you can have that there as well. You can learn how to subscribe and rate and review us all from productivitycast.net So if you visit the website, you&#8217;ll see the subscribe tab and it will give instructions on how to do all of those things. And with that I want to express my thanks to Augusto Pinaud, Francis Wade, and Art Gelwicks for joining me here on ProductivityCast this and every week, you can learn about more about them and their work by visiting productivitycast.net as well. I&#8217;m Ray Sidney-Smith and on behalf of all of us at ProductivityCast. Here&#8217;s your productive life.</p> <p>Voiceover Artist 48:43<br>That&#8217;s it for this productivity cast, the weekly show about all things productivity with your hosts, Ray Sidney-Smith and Augusto Pinaud with Francis Wade and Art Gelwicks.</p> <p></div> <p><a href="https://productivitycast.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2023/03/139-subjective-vs-objective-time-productivitycast_otter_ai.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Download a PDF of raw, text transcript of the interview here.</a></p>
play-circle icon
48 MIN
One Size Doesn’t Fit All – ProductivityCast Live
MAR 9, 2023
One Size Doesn’t Fit All – ProductivityCast Live
<p>Today, we’re releasing this episode which was recording live at the Task Management &amp; Time Blocking Summit 2023 stage. The theme of the conference is “One Size Doesn’t Fit All” and so the ProductivityCast team spent time discussing in front of the live audience what our thoughts are on challenges of one-size-fits-all and some thoughts of solving for it. Enjoy!</p> <p>(If you’re reading this in a podcast directory/app, please visit <a href="https://productivitycast.net/138">https://productivitycast.net/138</a> for clickable links and the full show notes and transcript of this cast.)</p> <p>Enjoy! <a href="http://productivitycast.net/contact/">Give us feedback</a>! And, thanks for listening!</p> <p>If you&#8217;d like to continue discussing <strong>One Size Doesn’t Fit All &#8211; ProductivityCast Live</strong> from this episode, please <a href="#reply-title">click here to leave a comment</a> down below (this jumps you to the bottom of the post).</p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">In this Cast | One Size Doesn’t Fit All &#8211; ProductivityCast Live</h2> <p><a href="http://productivitycast.net/about/">Ray Sidney-Smith</a></p> <p><a href="http://productivitycast.net/about/">Augusto Pinaud</a></p> <p><a href="http://productivitycast.net/about/">Art Gelwicks</a></p> <p><a href="https://productivitycast.net/about/">Francis Wade</a></p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">Show Notes | <strong>One Size Doesn’t Fit All &#8211; ProductivityCast Live</strong></h2> <p><em>Resources we mention, including links to them, will be provided here. Please listen to the episode for context.</em></p> <ul class="wp-block-list"> <li><a href="https://www.rememberthemilk.com/">Remember the Milk</a></li> <li><a href="https://anchor.fm/cross-platform-podcast">CrossPlatform</a> podcast</li> </ul> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">Raw Text Transcript | <strong>One Size Doesn’t Fit All &#8211; ProductivityCast Live</strong></h2> <p><em>Raw, unedited and machine-produced text transcript so there may be substantial errors, but you can search for specific points in the episode to jump to, or to reference back to at a later date and time, by keywords or key phrases. The time coding is mm:ss (e.g., 0:04 starts at 4 seconds into the cast’s audio).</em></p> <span><a onclick="read_toggle(1406976680, '', ''); return false;" class="read-link" id="readlink1406976680" style="readlink" href="#"></a></span> <div class="read_div" id="read1406976680" style="display: none;"></p> <p> Voiceover Artist 0:00<br>Are you ready to manage your work and personal world better to live a fulfilling productive life, then you&#8217;ve come to the right place. ProductivityCast the weekly show about all things productivity, here are your hosts, Ray Sidney-Smith and a Gousto pinout with Francis Wade and art Gelwicks.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 0:17<br>Welcome back, everybody to ProductivityCast the weekly show about all things personal productivity. I&#8217;m Ray Sidney-Smith.</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 0:22<br>I&#8217;m Augusto Pinaud.</p> <p>Francis Wade 0:23<br>I&#8217;m Francis Wade.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 0:24<br>And Art Gelwicks is with us somewhere in spirit. But he&#8217;ll be back hopefully, and with us shortly. Welcome, gentlemen. And welcome to you all, listening, live, watching live or listening after the fact to the podcast feed. We are here live at the task management and time blocking virtual summit 2023. And the theme for this summit is one size doesn&#8217;t fit all. And what Francis kind of positioned us to do here on this episode was to talk about really the the ideas behind what does one size fits all mean? Does it really make a difference in our productivity? Can we think about this in a more, I think fluid and dynamic way. And I&#8217;m going to play devil&#8217;s advocate a little bit in this Episode Episode to talk about really the, the fine line between efficiency and effectiveness, when we think about one size fits all methods, tools, and otherwise. And so what do we want to get started here, let&#8217;s let&#8217;s talk about one size fits all being a problem, because we&#8217;re consistently trying to do more. And as Francis talks about task volume, for instance, do you want to kind of talk to us about the number of projects and commitments that you typically talk about with regard to how one size fit all one size fits all really becomes a problem for folks, when they&#8217;re attempting to do more and more</p> <p>Francis Wade 1:48<br>Sure, is that we&#8217;re greedy. It&#8217;s, we fill our we fill our plates in terms of capacity. So we do as much as we can do, and we grow as much as we can grow. And when we get to a particular level, we still want more. So even if we pick up a new app and learn some new techniques and become more productive, because we can manage more tasks, eventually, or capacity runs out, because we just keep adding more tasks, we&#8217;re really until eventually, we coupled and start to experience problems all over again, it&#8217;s just human nature, the more we do can do, the more we want to do. And it&#8217;s just a matter of wanting, just being aspirational, just being positive. Having a vision for yourself, that is beyond your grasp. wanting more out of life, wanting to grow, wanting to learn wanting to contribute, wanting to serve, you know, there&#8217;s always all of these commitments, they sound great, because we are just wired that way. But what they all translate to in the world of task management in terms of what goes in your to do less than what goes in your calendar is one word more. So given that we always want more, there is no single set of techniques, and there&#8217;s no single tool that will ever serve us forever. It serves us up to a point. And then we want more. And we either give up wanting more, which some people do, or we change our approach. So that more becomes possible human nature.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 3:32<br>And I would probably put a different lens on this, I would filter that response to the fact that we are in various different cultures and societies that really require a lot of us today, you know, there, there is just a different sense of the world than at the turn of the last century, or even the turn of the prior century to that. There&#8217;s just so much more expected of us. And we are required to be connected to all of our past mistakes in a lot of ways. And that creates a lot of shame and regret for humans just generally. And I think the idea of one size fits all ends up being problematic for folks who do have any sense of their past, coming back to bother them haunt them, so to speak. And I don&#8217;t mean this in terms of like doing something bad. I mean, in terms of like just capturing your existing task volume, and recognizing that there&#8217;s a backlog that at its very nature causes a an emotional response that has its own effects on us. And I think that can be very, very troublesome for folks. So we have task volume. I&#8217;m going to kind of twist us to the other side to this, which is kind of Devil&#8217;s advocacy, right out the gate, which is to talk about the fact that we have lots of solutions in the world and In which the one size fits all works. And maybe not perfectly, but maybe enough, I&#8217;ll use the example of all in one productivity tools like an outlook outlook positions itself as the one tool you need for being able to manage communications. I think to some extent Microsoft Teams is starting to encroach in that space a bit. But But focusing on Outlook, right, we&#8217;ve got email, we&#8217;ve got calendar, we&#8217;ve got task management. At some point, it did a journaling type of tool in there as well, there was kind of a note taking capacity, you have add ins that extend on that. So it&#8217;s customizable, and it&#8217;s extensible, make the argument that that one size fits all strategy does not work for organizations.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 5:49<br>No, I&#8217;ll jump in there and say it absolutely doesn&#8217;t work for organizations. And it&#8217;s exactly what organizations need. And here&#8217;s why I say that. Because organizational implementation of those types of one size fits all solutions are not about the users using them. They&#8217;re about what it takes to maintain them, and what it costs to deploy them. And what it costs to license them. That&#8217;s the the objective. And that&#8217;s the purpose, it has nothing to do with whether or not it&#8217;s the best option for the end users, because they&#8217;re rarely taken into consideration for that. So when you have a tool like Outlook, where Microsoft will tell you that it will do everything, including slicing bread, it&#8217;s not, they don&#8217;t really care that, well, it&#8217;s not the best option for doing task management. And it&#8217;s not the best option for handling your calendar. Typically, what you&#8217;ll see retroactively is they&#8217;ll try to shoehorn functionality into it, to get it closer to those applications that actually do those very things. So, in a corporate environment, it&#8217;s extremely rare to actually get an application that&#8217;s really good at the singular job it&#8217;s supposed to do, because then you wind up with a huge number of applications to to maintain license and ultimately pay for</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 7:06<br>to go by little back to what Francis was saying. Us, you know, there are two problems, yes. Our task, you know, we go into task management or learning to manage our mess, because that overwhelm, okay, because we want more and more and more. And what is little say, in the world as you work with somebody is there is a moment in which you need to start looking for better. And what I mean by that is, as Francis was saying, and I will agree, there is a moment that you reach capacity. And when you reach capacity, what are you going to do, okay, as to this day, I have not been able to find the upgrade. Okay. So if somebody knows how to do an upgrade, please let me know. Okay, but since I cannot do an upgrade, this is what it is. So the moment you reach capacity, is when this game gets interesting, because that&#8217;s where the geeking and the time management and the story comes into place. Because now is how we are going to get better task, okay, on how we are going to maximize that resources, those resources that we have, so we can really be productive. That is where things that I have mentioned before, in other episodes of this podcast, that do not do list, what is the things that you need to stop doing? What is what you need to teach others to do when I work with families for task management? Okay. How do you teach your kids how to use these tools? Because it&#8217;s very interesting are my kids are 14 and 10. Okay, they can play with Windows, Mac, iPads, and Chromebooks. No problem, okay, switch between one or the other. But somehow, we parents, you know, don&#8217;t give them the tools that we know they&#8217;re going to need. Now do I think my kid will use not to be or to do is when they get to their professional life? Maybe not. But this is a great time to teach him, hey, you need to find a way to capture you need to find a way to collect and to think so that you can do so that way. They don&#8217;t get to where we got Okay, that is more and more and more and more crashed. Okay, but they can gradually learn that the only way they&#8217;re going to be very successful is as they reach capacity, they start looking for better.</p> <p>Francis Wade 9:46<br>I would add to that and say that it&#8217;s not it&#8217;s not. Greed is a big part of it in terms of personal aspirations, greed for more capacity or wanting and needing more capacity. But also there&#8217;s no standing still, you know, I had one inbox when I was in 1995 96, one inbox that got five email messages per week. Let&#8217;s see, I now have, I can&#8217;t even count the number of inboxes, that I have places where I can get messages. And the email is at least the least up to 200 to 300 a day. So I&#8217;m in a totally different zone than I was way back when, and trying to manage my whole world with one inbox, one email address, as if I got three or five emails a day is unworkable. So if I look to the future, why should I think that this is going to be the limit of the inboxes? And messages that I have to manage? No, chances are, there&#8217;s going to be more because that&#8217;s just the way technology is going. And you know, there&#8217;ll be everybody has an uncle or a cousin who sends them conspiracy theories, right? You know, back in 1995, that didn&#8217;t happen. So you&#8217;re getting a lot more potential time demands, potential tasks coming into these inboxes. And you can&#8217;t do anything about it, you can&#8217;t write off the world, you could, but you don&#8217;t want to write off your uncle, because he&#8217;s sending you conspiracy theories. So you need a way to cope with the change in technology. So that&#8217;s not a change in necessarily your practice. It&#8217;s that you&#8217;re being given inboxes people are using email, and they&#8217;re sending you more messages, and you either coach yourself off, or you at least pretend to accept them.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 11:24<br>What I&#8217;m hearing from both you and Gousto kind of brings this thought to mind, which is that when we are thinking about the concept of of the more specific we get, though, not just in terms of of this kind of sense of having to use many different tools for many different things. But the more you focus actually, on one thing, the more likely you are to need a specific tool for that thing, right, because the better you know, the confines of that project or repeatable task, then the more bespoke the tool can be or the set of protocols can be to doing that thing, I use very specific tools for producing this podcast, that are very tailored to just doing this work. They&#8217;re not tools that I use everyday for anything else. And so they&#8217;re, they&#8217;re designed for that. So I would not, I would not try to use an audio editor to do video editing, right, you know, like, those kinds of things don&#8217;t make sense. But in my system, I&#8217;m capable of toggling back and forth between both efficiency and effectiveness. But specifically for these kinds of, I don&#8217;t know, the more you focus on the the work at hand, the better you&#8217;re able to identify the the tools that are going to be best for that kind of work. And even to the extent of I keep track of what needs to be done, and a completely different tool for the podcast, that I do everything else in my world. And it&#8217;s just because it&#8217;s simpler for me to be able to look not only in that system for that work. So hopefully that gives a little bit of mental fodder for folks to think about in that sense.</p> <p>Francis Wade 13:07<br>I would also add today, because are you going to be using the same audio editor five years from now? No chance.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 13:15<br>And this is actually a good, good point to address this. If it&#8217;s customizable, is it really one size fits all? I&#8217;d argue that no if it if it may only provide a limited number of sizes, but it&#8217;s still not a single size. That&#8217;s I think, where we start to get into this difference between a tool and a platform. And when you start to look at functional tools, functional tools are typically, for lack of a better term, one size fits all for that function. They are designed to do a job audio recording perfect example, I would not use an audio recorder to manage a spreadsheet, why that is not its functional purpose as a tool. However, a platform that is designed to handle multiple types of functionality. We&#8217;ll never excel in any one of them. It is truly the jack of all trades. But it does give you that capability to configure and match your needs sent more specifically. This is where we have the problem though. It&#8217;s not a tool or a platform issue. It&#8217;s what are you asking it to do? Are you asking this thing to define how you should do something? Or do you understand how you should do something well enough to define it for this thing? And I think that&#8217;s where people get hung up. Because they&#8217;ll look at something that&#8217;s a platform, like a notion for example, and they&#8217;ll expect it to be able to do what a to do is does. Well Todoist has a specific objective task management that&#8217;s that&#8217;s its gig. It is not designed to be a database. It is not designed to be a note management system. It&#8217;s not it&#8217;s not its purpose in life. So we have to understand what is our need set. Because ultimately you do want to get to a one size fits your needs. But when all four of us would look at a task management system, we&#8217;re all going to have different needs sets.</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 15:21<br>But you change the and I think that&#8217;s where that need to go is the question is not one size fits all. One size fits you, what will fit you. And that is one thing that we go into this show and come over and over and over. You know, what works for Francis or yourself or Ray? Okay, doesn&#8217;t matter how effective it is, may never work for me. Okay, I&#8217;m even we were joking on the pre show. Okay, how my kid got an Android. Okay. And he was complaining about his speed. And I almost told him get a no, but okay, and but why? Well, because I leave on an iPad, that&#8217;s what is happening, okay. And is that we have established, there is no difference. But what happened is that what it will work for me may not work for anybody. And that&#8217;s a key into that, what is the trust, it doesn&#8217;t matter if the size fit or don&#8217;t fit, what matter is to understand it, that&#8217;s the challenge, what will work for you. And then when you go into those corporate environments, how you can get those standard tools that you&#8217;re going to get work for you. But first and foremost, you need to understand what works for you.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 16:43<br>I don&#8217;t think one size fits me, I am very comfortable with having multiple tools for multiple different similar veins of my world. And to some great extent it&#8217;s because of compartmentalization, I want to be able to very clearly have a distinction between my work and my personal world. And so that&#8217;s just an easy and clear distinction to have different tools for those things aren&#8217;t go ahead, and we can come back to this topic,</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 17:09<br>I was gonna say there&#8217;s, I got into a conversation about this with a friend of mine recently. And we got, we got talking about what productive pants are you wearing that day. And I have to explain that if you go into your closet, you don&#8217;t have 14 pairs of the exact same pair of pants, guaranteed. You have dress pants, you have work pants, you have casual pants, you may have sweat pants, you have pants for specific purpose, but they&#8217;re all pants, they fit you, they do that job that needed that is needed to be done at that time period. Now, if you&#8217;re looking for one pair of pants, that can do everything, you might find it, the odds are pretty good, you won&#8217;t, you may find something that you can wear all the times like our good old blue jeans, or you may want to be that specialized to have you know, these are my gardening pants. And these are my car working pants. And these are my fancy dance pants, whatever it&#8217;s finding, as we&#8217;ve as we&#8217;ve talked about what fits you now and I&#8217;ll stress the now part because for apparently my pants have changed size. So sometimes my pants fit and sometimes my pants don&#8217;t fit. So you have to adjust accordingly. And and when you look at a tool that is that rigidly locked down, that provides a structure that you just follow these dots, it can&#8217;t adjust with you. And that&#8217;s where I think a lot of people get into the mistake of the one size fits all. They look for a tool that provides them a structure without recognizing that they may not fit that tool.</p> <p>Francis Wade 18:43<br>But it&#8217;s some kind of introspection required to figure out your need. If I can&#8217;t see myself, I would have a difficult time fitting into a corporate environment at this point. From a pest management point of view, because of the tools I use, you know, I could imagine the IT department saying Oh 90% of these you can&#8217;t even touch but you&#8217;re here on the job. And that would mean that my productivity would plummet because I would be forced into not using a tool, for instance using the one they gave me. So if I start from the inside out, I tell the truth about what I&#8217;m doing. And I become this rare doc that probably wouldn&#8217;t fit into a rigid system, I&#8217;d have to find some accommodation. But let&#8217;s at least a bit of introspection about what I do and what I need and even how I find new stuff. Because I like trying new things with the hope of replacing what I&#8217;m currently using in task management or anywhere else. So I think there&#8217;s an introspective action here. Kind of to understand what my needs are.</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 19:48<br>You see and you bring you bring a very interesting point and art and I discussed this point in the Cross Platform podcast extensively because of what you said Okay, as you said, I will not be able to go into the corporate environment and you have valid reason. But you are making that conscious choice, and you have the ability to make that choice. What happened with the people who don&#8217;t, okay, who Hey, their life happened on that corporate are great, it&#8217;s a great opportunity or for whatever reason, they are moving, or they have always been into that. And now they have that IT guy who said you cannot. And that is very critical and very important, and how it comes even to be more critical or more important to understand what you need. So you can adapt it to that, so you can make it work in the confines of the box. Okay, the box may be smaller, the box may be more difficult to fit, but now it gets, okay, how I&#8217;m going to keep us productive with this little box, and how can I dis constraints or make work these constraints, so I can really be productive?</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 21:05<br>What are some practical components of all of this, that people can take away? Specifically, you know, many of us are in, you know, one phase of our life for a pretty considerable amount of time, you know, whether that be considered the prime working years or otherwise, some folks are in the ramp up years, right, where they&#8217;re where they&#8217;re maybe new to the workforce, some people may be retired or in a in a secondary career, some are in their fifth career, you know, some entrepreneurs out there, or they&#8217;re retired, and therefore, it&#8217;s not really task volume, but really just managing the everyday repeatable items. And then specialized projects. So all of these require some level of, of as Francis noted, introspection, I usually say surfacing to awareness, right? Like, we need things to be surface to awareness for us to be able to know that they need to be managed. So what are some practical things we can think about when it comes to one size, not fitting everything in our own personal worlds.</p> <p>Francis Wade 22:07<br>Underpin the, it tells me not that it tells me but I, I find out what I need to look for. So I&#8217;m able to narrow my search. So I remember, like, if I could think of a good example, I would, but I remember needing a particular tool for my task management, and not being able to find it for a couple years. And then having to oh, there is one. So my time tracking, I use an app on my phone that doesn&#8217;t quite fit with prompts me whenever some time has passed that I&#8217;ve not tracked my time. And I have a practice of tracking sometimes during the day and definitely at night, it&#8217;s become more accurate. Because I used to track every two weeks, I used to capture screenshots using a program. And then every two weeks I would laborious Lee go through the screenshots and then estimate all the time that I spent in different times. And it was always up to do some guessing. Because if I was away from the computer, or if it didn&#8217;t capture the screenshot, I&#8217;d be like, Oh, my God, I have no idea what I was doing that day. So I wished for something more portable and more ready, ready, readily useful. So I use this program and it works works really well. So if we know we have the need, we can start looking for the solution. And it took me a couple of years to find it. It didn&#8217;t exist at the beginning of my search, but somewhere along the line it got invented. So this introspection gives us a way of specking out our needs, and then doing a targeted search.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 23:42<br>It&#8217;s two things one, know what puts you on the struggle bus. What are the things that that you encountered for me? What are the things that I encounter on a daily basis that caused me struggle, anxiety, difficulty, derail productivity, all those negative things? What are those trigger points, those are the things regardless of the solution that I have, that have to be addressed. The second thing though, is and I jotted it down here, know thyself, and know thy tools. So I&#8217;m adding on to that old phrase, because and we talked about this all the time. If you know your tools, if you take your time to learn your tools, whether you have one multiple or dozens doesn&#8217;t matter, as long as you know your tools. If your tool should have to change, you can change, you can transfer that knowledge set to whatever the new solution is. And if we go back to what Ray was talking about earlier about the audio recording, if you should change audio recording tools, all that knowledge about audio recording doesn&#8217;t go away. It just has to be transformed into the new syntax and structure of the new tool. And that&#8217;s what we have to do is we have to define and document Our own syntax and structure. If we do that, then whatever tool we look at whatever path we go down, we can apply that syntax and structure to, if I go back to my pants analogy, it doesn&#8217;t matter what pants I buy, they&#8217;re still my legs. So I understand what&#8217;s going in the pants. And as long as you know, and as long as I adapt for that, it should be workable, and I can then continue to make it function. There is an underlying expectation that the tools and the platforms we use will change. It is exceptionally rare to see anybody who is able to use something for years and years and years and decades. And because the technology itself changes, and when I say technology, just even paper, we got erasable pens, that&#8217;s a technology change. It changes how you think about things that changes how you do things.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 25:56<br>I know that over the past year, plus I have been, we&#8217;re going through the process of determining what I need. In a task manager, I&#8217;ve been as many know, I&#8217;ve been using Remember The Milk to great effect for many, many years. And I think I&#8217;m you&#8217;re 13 or 14 or something like that now, and it just serves its purpose, I haven&#8217;t had a need for anything more spectacular, quite honestly, it does a lot. I mean, now they have milk script, which is an entire kind of JavaScript based scripting platform for being able to do that. And that kind of automation. And it&#8217;s, it&#8217;s amazing, I love Remember The Milk. But I also have this drive this need this desire, Francis would call it greed. To to, to consolidate into an existing tool that I have. And generally that doesn&#8217;t bother me. But I have been feeling this need to, to kind of do the one size fits all thing. And so I&#8217;ve been it&#8217;s been interesting for me though, it&#8217;s it&#8217;s allowed me to be able to sit down and say, What are the criteria that I need, or as art was noting for this to be rock solid for me. And I realized that I actually don&#8217;t need that many things, I really, I really what I want is the ability to be able to have that tool, speak to other tools. And then otherwise, the basics are enough for me. And I think that&#8217;s something that you should start to think about for yourself. Like if my tool connects to Zapier, or it integrates directly with the other tools that I need, then perhaps the existing tool doesn&#8217;t need to be detritus now, it&#8217;s just a functional tool that you can use. And it&#8217;s and then it&#8217;s extended by other tools. And I hate to be focused too much on the tool itself. But just thinking for yourself through any given protocol, right, any any, any way that we think about how we work, think about the way in which it integrates into the rest of your work flows. And then you can start to think of them as puzzle pieces. Right? That that extends to skills. If you think about how you, you know, if you&#8217;re doing carpentry, or any of those other kinds of things, something that art knows more about than I will ever you know, woodworking and so on and so forth. You know, but you learn a skill, a craft like that, those become skills that you then can apply in other areas, right you can you can go into the kitchen and be like, oh, you know what the the the woodblock that holds the knives can be sharpened and cleaned up and done in a particular way using the right whetstones whatever they might be. That&#8217;s that&#8217;s a replicable skill outside of the context. And I think a lot of people forget the concept of being able to contextualize generalizable skills. And so we can have very specific skills. But those skills can then be generalized in some some fashion with just very, very minor tweaking,</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 28:59<br>I don&#8217;t know if I want if I&#8217;m worried about the tool that can do everything. Because I prefer it will be ideal to have all the tools communicate and come to one place. But the reality is that it&#8217;s okay to have the different compartments and it&#8217;s okay to have the different tools and it&#8217;s okay, that everything don&#8217;t necessarily gets to one place. And the only reason I said that is because what the experience has show is that if you put everything in one place that will work amazingly, if you can make distinctions the only tool I have found, and yes, I am an expert in and ask the expert is not me. And the only reason that works so well enough me is because the tools allows you to have the different instances. So when you open the application, you see this is my personal This is my business. This is the other thing that I have And even though they are all in one application, they are certain distinction. There are certain things that work very well together. And there are certain things that the distance, it&#8217;s very healthy.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 30:13<br>Fantastic. All right. So we have one question coming in from a listener Pedro. Hello. As he says, at one time, it seemed that an effective personal information manager or Pim, the aim was the Holy Grail, so to speak for knowledge workers, do we now live in a time when we shouldn&#8217;t go on this quest, that is, should we should we not try to find that one solely useful tool, who wants to tackle that?</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 30:39<br>I think we&#8217;re constantly looking for that tool. I think that&#8217;s part of this underlying quest. I mean, when you talk about a PIM, I go all the way back to tools like arriba, back in the old DOS days, where we were junior or sidekick, where we were trying to get an application that would be our basic assistant, handling our external information, internal information organization, doing all the things that we found, we were never particularly good at doing. We are still in that continual quest, if we weren&#8217;t, we wouldn&#8217;t be having this conversation, nor of looking at these applications, tools like to do is to nos be a notion have come from that evolution. And I don&#8217;t think we will ever see that quest end because of the underlying premise of this whole conversation, which is that one size does not fit all, there will always be someone who says, I have a better way of doing it. And you should use my way. And we will eternally see that. So as long as we see things out there, that give us the opportunity to take, adapt, configure and apply. I think we&#8217;ll still continue to see this evolution, if we ever get to a point where we have one tool that works for every absolutely every one all the time, I&#8217;m actually a little concerned, because then I think we&#8217;re missing something cool. Seeing that sci fi movie,</p> <p>Francis Wade 32:05<br>I agree with you that it&#8217;s not going to happen, we&#8217;re in a it&#8217;s a moving target, or needs are moving technology&#8217;s moving. And that means that the choice of tool has to move as well.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 32:16<br>Something that we will get to is a point where most tools integrate, most tools can be in some way shape or form automated. And we are getting closer toward a place where whether we call it AI or you know, some kind of, you know, machine learning solution becomes so convincingly fluid in our lives right there embedded in the tools themselves, that the combination of those these three things, integration, automation, and artificial intelligence, makes it more fluid for us to be able to have that kind of personal information management, that kind of like speaking to Jarvis, Allah, Tony Stark and Iron Man, you know, where you just have this seamless experience where that entity that code is doing so much of the work for you that it seems more fluid, and it&#8217;s ubiquitous, it&#8217;s on all screens and all surfaces for you to be able to interact. I think there is a point where we get to that kind of pseudo singularity, I don&#8217;t think that it is very close at hand. But it can be useful in a lot of ways in its patchworked sense today. And I think that&#8217;s really important for us all to kind of take hold. I think the consensus here is that one size doesn&#8217;t fit all. But you can find a size that fits you within context. And I think it&#8217;s really important for us to all continually surface that to awareness. And so thank you, gentlemen, for this wonderful conversation. While we are at the end of our conversation for the recording. We are not at the end of our discussion. In totality. If you have a question or comment, feel free to go ahead and visit us on our podcast website page, you can go to ProductivityCast debt dotnet and leave a comment there you can also join our community by going to ProductivityCast dotnet forward slash community and and going ahead and joining the community and continuing along in the dialogue there as well. If you have a topic to suggest or otherwise, go ahead and post those in the community. I always love new topics, suggestions or questions. And of course I want to express my thanks to Augusto Pinaud, Francis Wade, and Art Gelwicks for joining me here on ProductivityCast this every week, thank you to our live audience for this ProductivityCast live recording. Really fun to be able to interact with you all while we record. And that has been a it&#8217;s been a lot of fun to be able to do as well. I&#8217;m Ray Sidney-Smith and on behalf of all of us here at ProductivityCast Here&#8217;s your productive life.</p> <p>Voiceover Artist 34:41<br>That&#8217;s it for this productivity cast, the weekly show about all things productivity with your hosts, Ray Sidney-Smith and Augusto Pinaud with Francis Wade and Art Gelwicks.</p> <p></div> <p><a href="https://productivitycast.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2023/03/138-one-size-doesnt-fit-all-live-pcast_otter_ai.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Download a PDF of raw, text transcript of the interview here.</a></p>
play-circle icon
34 MIN
Hyper-Scheduling: Commentary on MacSparky’s Granular Time Blocking Method
MAR 6, 2023
Hyper-Scheduling: Commentary on MacSparky’s Granular Time Blocking Method
<p>In a post entitled, <a href="https://www.macsparky.com/blog/tag/hyper-scheduling/"><em>Hyper-Scheduling</em></a>, David Sparks (a/k/a MacSparky) writes about his method of time blocking on a granular level. This week, the ProductivityCast team provides their commentary, challenges and methods on this concept of hyper-scheduling, which will hopefully spark ideas on how you can better manage your time-based work.</p> <p>(If you’re reading this in a podcast directory/app, please visit <a href="https://productivitycast.net/137">https://productivitycast.net/137</a> for clickable links and the full show notes and transcript of this cast.)</p> <p>Enjoy! <a href="http://productivitycast.net/contact/">Give us feedback</a>! And, thanks for listening!</p> <p>If you&#8217;d like to continue discussing <strong><strong>Hyper-Scheduling: Commentary on MacSparky&#8217;s Granular Time Blocking Method</strong></strong> from this episode, please <a href="#reply-title">click here to leave a comment</a> down below (this jumps you to the bottom of the post).</p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">In this Cast | <strong>Hyper-Scheduling: Commentary on MacSparky&#8217;s Granular Time Blocking Method</strong></h2> <p><a href="http://productivitycast.net/about/">Ray Sidney-Smith</a></p> <p><a href="http://productivitycast.net/about/">Augusto Pinaud</a></p> <p><a href="http://productivitycast.net/about/">Art Gelwicks</a></p> <p><a href="https://productivitycast.net/about/">Francis Wade</a></p> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">Show Notes | <strong>Hyper-Scheduling: Commentary on MacSparky&#8217;s Granular Time Blocking Method</strong></h2> <p><em>Resources we mention, including links to them, will be provided here. Please listen to the episode for context.</em></p> <ul class="wp-block-list"> <li><a href="https://www.macsparky.com/blog/tag/hyper-scheduling">Hyper-scheduling &#8211; MacSparky</a> </li> <li><a href="https://rsidneysmith.com/productivity/unschedule-anti-procrastination-productivity-system-neil-fiore-the-now-habit/">Unschedule</a></li> <li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acGK7jrkd4U">How to Use the Unschedule &#8211; Video Tutorial</a>&nbsp;</li> </ul> <p>Google Assistant Time-Based Actions:</p> <ul class="wp-block-list"> <li>Events &#8211;<a href="https://support.google.com/assistant/answer/7678386?hl=en&amp;co=GENIE.Platform%3DAndroid"> https://support.google.com/assistant/answer/7678386?hl=en&amp;co=GENIE.Platform%3DAndroid</a></li> <li>Reminders &#8211;<a href="https://support.google.com/assistant/answer/9387035?hl=en&amp;co=GENIE.Platform%3DAndroid"> https://support.google.com/assistant/answer/9387035?hl=en&amp;co=GENIE.Platform%3DAndroid</a></li> <li>Timers &#8211;<a href="https://support.google.com/googlenest/answer/7028899?hl=en"> https://support.google.com/googlenest/answer/7028899?hl=en</a></li> </ul> <h2 class="wp-block-heading">Raw Text Transcript | <strong>Hyper-Scheduling: Commentary on MacSparky&#8217;s Granular Time Blocking Method</strong></h2> <p><em>Raw, unedited and machine-produced text transcript so there may be substantial errors, but you can search for specific points in the episode to jump to, or to reference back to at a later date and time, by keywords or key phrases. The time coding is mm:ss (e.g., 0:04 starts at 4 seconds into the cast’s audio).</em></p> <span><a onclick="read_toggle(421460192, '', ''); return false;" class="read-link" id="readlink421460192" style="readlink" href="#"></a></span> <div class="read_div" id="read421460192" style="display: none;"></p> <p>Voiceover Artist 0:00<br>Are you ready to manage your work and personal world better to live a fulfilling productive life, then you&#8217;ve come to the right place. ProductivityCast the weekly show about all things productivity, here are your hosts, Ray Sidney-Smith and Augusto Pinaud with Francis Wade and Art Gelwicks.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 0:17<br>Welcome back, everybody to ProductivityCast the weekly show about all things personal productivity. I&#8217;m Ray Sidney-Smith.</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 0:23<br>I&#8217;m Augusto Pinaud.</p> <p>Francis Wade 0:24<br>I&#8217;m Francis Wade.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 0:25<br>And I&#8217;m Art Gelwicks.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 0:26<br>Welcome, gentlemen. And welcome to our listeners to this episode, today, we are going to be talking about the calendar and really how to utilize the calendar to be more effective, really related to David Sparks. And some of you may know him as Mac Sparky at macsparky.com and the Mac Power Users podcast, he has been writing about something that he calls hyper-scheduling since 2018. And I thought we would actually tackle this topic in terms of just covering what he is really talking about in his series of articles around this. And so in 2018, he wrote this article that he said he was experimenting over the last month, in essence doing more deliberate scheduling of his time. And so really, what it looks like is a an explanation of what is time blocking the idea of being able to put blocks of time in your schedule. In his particular case, he&#8217;s calling it hyper-scheduling, I believe, because he is identifying more granular times where he&#8217;s doing things. So instead of say, large swaths of time for the day, he&#8217;s putting smaller and smaller blocks of time in the calendar for particular activities. And he defines various blocks. And he gives you the opportunity to be able to think about your own world in terms of what those smaller, more granular blocks could be, for purposes of having a schedule that you can fall in line with, as you make your way through the day. And the idea here, at least as I understand it, is that he&#8217;s giving himself the leeway to change things around. But it&#8217;s just a little bit more structure. He does this the night before. So instead of the morning of he does this the night before, and he gives some mechanics and so forth. He&#8217;s written five or six articles about this over the last three years. And so I thought it&#8217;d be helpful for us to walk through through some of these pieces. And he&#8217;s written some clarifying components of this, you know, some of the feedback he&#8217;s gotten and his responses to those as well. And so let&#8217;s just start off with that explanation kind of under our belt, right? This is kind of like a variant, or his his take on time blocking? What do you think about this take on time blocking? And what parts are good? What parts do you feel like, have an opportunity for improvement,</p> <p>Francis Wade 2:56<br>he talks about capturing the schedule, initially on PayPal. And I&#8217;ve noticed, the first thing is that I changed my time blocking depending on how busy I am. So I&#8217;m in a hyper busy period this week, because I have a conference coming up that I&#8217;m in charge of, or hosting. And every minute of every day is valuable. And you know, I&#8217;m swapping things in and swapping things out and pushing things to next week. I&#8217;m in that mode where you&#8217;re trying to conserve as much time as possible before a deadline hits. And I normally would keep my schedule on my calendar, but the ad on my digital calendar. But the idea of going into my calendar and doing it and dragging around and dropping, and then going through all the different steps that it takes. For me to get to the calendar I want seems like a lot of work. So when I&#8217;m in this face, I just made a paper calendar, I started to write things down because in a minute, I&#8217;m done as opposed to 10 minutes, or 15. And it made me think he&#8217;s onto something. First thing he talks about the use of a digital PayPal entry and I forget the name you guys can you guys are experts in that area, you can speak to that. But it struck me that the interface and how easy it is to do time blocking has a lot to do with what kind of time blocking you do. Because I&#8217;m probably going to go back to using the computer using Google Calendar or schedule an escape path after this week. But interesting, I think there&#8217;s different approaches depending on how busy you are and how much spare time you have. And he may be hinting at that.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 4:41<br>I liked the idea of that level of scheduling. I just don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s practical, at least not not in my world. I mean, it&#8217;s it&#8217;s nice to be able to go through and say, you know this will take 15 This will take 25 But I just don&#8217;t think that works in most cases you spent So much time monkeying around with your schedule, that you almost get to a point where you&#8217;re not getting anything done. I mean, I like the idea, the bigger idea of time blocking where you say, Okay, I&#8217;m going to allocate, you know, two hours to work on this today, and set that in your schedule. But as you dig down more granular, you&#8217;re getting really to the point of a checklist with times assigned to it in my book. And that&#8217;s, I think there&#8217;s a law of diminishing returns, that starts to creep into this fairly quickly.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 5:32<br>I think this is highly dependent upon the type of work that you do, and the expectations you have of the other people around you. And so if you are delegating work, if you are managing people, and if you&#8217;re working in any collaborative environment, many of these things are going to break down if you don&#8217;t have a lot of control over your own time. And so in my particular world, where I do have a lot of control over my time, like I have almost exclusive control over my work day. And so the idea that I give control, so to speak to others to schedule, time in my calendar, or those kinds of things, you know, I&#8217;ve latitude to reject calendar events, move them around all of those kinds of things. And that does give me the ability to do some variant of time blocking if I wanted to. And so I can see this working for me, if I if I liked the idea of my calendar being filled with things other than meetings. And I think just because as a GTD er, I have a tendency to think about things from a list perspective, and not from a calendar perspective. You know, calendars are for meetings in my world, and then those things that do need to be done in a timeframe. And that means that there&#8217;s actually more in the calendar than one might think. But at the same time, I do tend to use those calendar anchors for prompting me to look at my lists for what can be done. So in essence, the, the time blocking in my world is actually a context, not a set of tasks. And that sounds to me a little bit about what David Sparks is talking about here, where he has these, there triggers for contexts of things to do, and there&#8217;s a melange there, have, you know, he&#8217;s got a little bit of, you know, go do X, go do Y, those kinds of things, you know, routine based items. But for me, I like the idea of saying at this particular time, I&#8217;m going to transition and, you know, shift my modality from one to the next. And when I&#8217;m doing that, this is the thing I&#8217;m going to work on next. So when I look at the calendar, I can see oh, right, in two hours, I&#8217;m going to be shifting gears to this chunk of work. And that gives me the ability to start kind of moving myself in that direction, which I think can be helpful.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 8:00<br>What&#8217;s too small, what size time block is too little at work to 15</p> <p>Francis Wade 8:06<br>minute blocks. But again, only in times when you have no discretionary time. Like for example, if I&#8217;m in a situation where I have three meetings, which are almost back to back, and I only have a half an hour between each one, then I&#8217;m going to not only have the energy, I&#8217;m going to schedule the time in between the meetings to do something that takes 15 minutes or half an hour. But on a regular day, like really I have discretion over my time, and I have some discretionary time, I think it&#8217;s a matter of how much slack time do you have, if you have the slack time, then you don&#8217;t need to get down to 15 minute increments. But if you&#8217;re if you&#8217;re running on a clock, if you&#8217;re if you&#8217;re someone who has commitments and things you have to do, at particular times at five o&#8217;clock, that person is going to call at 530 Someone else is going to call if you&#8217;re in a situation where it&#8217;s like that, then I think you go into smaller increments.</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 9:07<br>So my approach is a little different time obviously play a factor. But also what is my ability to focus because I wish to tell you that I everyday can focus 100% and be hyper focused and that is, at least in my world doesn&#8217;t happen. There are days that is harder for me to focus harder for me to concentrate harder for me to stay in task. Those days, the time block goes smaller, because I can convince, persuade, or stay on task 10 to 15 minutes that I struggle with that and then change or continue or set another 10 minutes. When my ability to focus is high. I can set larger chunks and I&#8217;m able to stay on them. But as my attention is scatter I need those time blocks to be smaller so I can stay on top of them.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 10:04<br>I&#8217;ll just note that based on what a Gousto said, is that most people are in the same set of focus times throughout their days, every day. So while some of us have days that are very different than the other, that does not change your biology. So when we have a perception that for somehow somehow we have lower sets of focus, at this moment in time, the likelihood is that that&#8217;s a feeling not a reality. And so we have to remember that we have a rhythm in which we follow. And your body naturally is more focused. During those times, we&#8217;ve talked about this in past episodes, whether that be the concept of your circadian rhythm and following along with the ultradian rhythm, but you have these focused periods of time where you are naturally inclined to have strong executive function, lean into those times. And if you just do a little bit of analysis, you can find those times. So that means that every day you get a repeat on that same opportunity. So even if there are some days where you may have a meeting that overlaps that, or maybe you have some crazy making that&#8217;s going on in those periods of time, generally, if you can allot that time, to that high focus work, you&#8217;re going to be much more likely to get that kind of, of creative or flow work done during those periods of time.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 11:24<br>So I&#8217;m gonna go back to the size question, because I still, I&#8217;m still struggling with part of it, we talked about the 15 minute interval, which isn&#8217;t unrealistic matter of fact, many calendar applications, that&#8217;s the most granular level of interval that they&#8217;ll provide to you. But is it really 15 minutes, I mean, we&#8217;ve talked about before about giving yourself time to spin up an activity and then spin it down for the next one. So even if you give yourself two minutes to spin it up, do the work and two minutes to spin it down. You&#8217;re really only talking about 10 minutes of active time. This is how much time are we going to spend breaking things down to little tiny things to do. I mean, I understand filler spaces and things like that. But there&#8217;s a point where could this even be anxiety inducing? Because now you&#8217;ve got it to such a tight schedule, and now you get a call in erupts? Or something else that happens and throws the entire thing off kilter? Is all that wasted exercise, then I have my doubts.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 12:40<br>So my, my response would be to that art, which is that, you know, there is a point where too much is too much, right? Where, you know, if you if you create too much structure, you will naturally rebel against that structure, right, there isn&#8217;t a natural component there. At the same time, if you have no structure, then there is a structure even when you don&#8217;t believe there&#8217;s a structure, right, so you&#8217;re gonna fall into path of least resistance and likely the things that you don&#8217;t want to do, and the things that you do want to do or the things that won&#8217;t get done. So we have to balance those things out. And I think that you&#8217;re right, in knowing thyself, in the sense of choosing the right amount of structure, that&#8217;s going to be the guardrails to keep you moving toward, like staying on the road requires lines to tell you that you&#8217;re staying on the road. And, you know, you could you could drive on roads without lines, but I bet you a lot of people would start cracking into each other, and driving off the road more often if the lines didn&#8217;t, didn&#8217;t exist. And so it just depends on how many lines do we need on the road, right? And how close to those lines need to be to each other. Francis</p> <p>Francis Wade 13:45<br>with analogy, I live in a country where most of the roads don&#8217;t have lanes. So there is a certain man</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 13:54<br>I&#8217;m from New York City where the roads have lines and we still don&#8217;t abide by them. We have been</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 14:00<br>on those lines and New York is just as a reference is not to be follow. It&#8217;s a reference thing for the people from</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 14:08<br>Pennsylvania, we hide the lines and potholes. So</p> <p>Francis Wade 14:13<br>you can never tell. But I was I was thinking also to add what I said before that they when you&#8217;re on vacation, you obviously well. Most of us on vacation don&#8217;t need 15 minute increments. So it&#8217;s not like there&#8217;s a hard and fast rule about which approach to use. I think it&#8217;s horses for courses. You just be flexible and adapt and use the amount use the granularity that you need to get life done. And be ready to abandon it not abandon. You&#8217;re ready to switch gears. When life changes. Something else comes at you like like I for example, I can time block a Saturday fairly effectively, or a Sunday without interruption or I because the people who would interrupt me aren&#8217;t working. So I say, Okay, well, this is a great opportunity for me to get stuff I want to get done. Because the chances of being interrupted are really low, very different for Monday or Friday. But the bottom line is to be very aware of the volume of time demands that you&#8217;re dealing with, and then adjust accordingly. And not get stuck with excellent people doing any one particular way of time blocking versus any other sort of being sensitive to say, Okay, I have this amount of discretionary time, do I need a time block, if I don&#8217;t, then I could just put one, put nothing in my calendar at all, then just go with it go with the appointments. I found myself moving between the extremes and just using whatever I need to say, whenever it&#8217;s whatever I need to use whenever it&#8217;s needed,</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 15:55<br>I don&#8217;t want to come across as being negative on this idea of hyper scheduling. And I realized I was doing that a little bit earlier. And I think it&#8217;s partially because I approach this from a different angle, I use what I often refer to as the Lego methodology, where within your schedule and your time blocks, there&#8217;s two types of schedules are two types of time blocks, they&#8217;re the time blocks that absolutely heavy time constraint tied to them, because they have to happen by a particular date and time. So if you&#8217;ve got something that has to happen, by the end of the day, you block out specific time to get that stuff done, then there&#8217;s time blocks where work can get done. But the work to be done in that time block is unspecified at that point. So let&#8217;s say you&#8217;ve got a 15 minute interval between meetings, you could block that time. And this is what I often do is a block that type of my calendar as a 15 minute work block. Where that comes in handy is in my task list, I have tags on a large number of my tasks that are not time specific as to the estimated duration of the task to complete. So if it&#8217;s, you know, cleaned out my inbox for my email that maybe that&#8217;s a 15 minute task. Well, it&#8217;s tagged as a 15 minute task. And if I look at my to do list right now, I probably have about 30 or 4015 minute tasks that are sitting in in there that need to be done, but not by a specific date and time that when that 15 minute window hits on my schedule, I can pop over my task list, look down that list of tags for 15 minutes and say, Oh, I&#8217;m going to do that one now, and move on to the next one. So that is in my mind, that&#8217;s a type of hyper scheduling. But it&#8217;s a flexible one because it allows me to decompose interruptions. So let&#8217;s say for example, I had a one hour meeting blocked out on my calendar, and it gets cancelled. After doing my happy dance, I realized that I&#8217;ve got an hour of work time available to me, Well, now I can decompose that time. That could be an hour, it could be 230 minute tasks, it could be for 15 minute tasks, it could be, you know, 610 minute tasks, however, I want to decompose that and apply it to the work that needs to be done. I can none of those items are pre scheduled as per se. But it means that that&#8217;s time that&#8217;s not lost. And maybe some of those tasks are mindfulness and personal health tasks. You know, maybe it&#8217;s a coffee break task that I throw in there. Great. That counts too. And I can punch through that on the list. So every day, you know, if I have a calisthenics period, I go grab my 15 minutes for that because that window of opportunity showed up. So when I think about the hyper scheduling idea, I believe that&#8217;s where I struggle with it is assuming that you have a level of control that you don&#8217;t, for those of us who don&#8217;t, and not being able to create a structure that we can flex within whenever we need to. And if I think about the article that we were looking at, there are some examples that kind of resonate with that were he would have a block of time and then subdivide that block of time. Well, it&#8217;s a similar principle, I may allocate three hours for QA checking on a site I built great. Within that three hour time period, I&#8217;ve got lots of smaller things and I may subdivide those accordingly. odds are pretty good, they have a sequence to them, but they may not. It may just be work that has to be done and move along. That actually fits much closer to an agile methodology than it does anything else.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 19:44<br>I think we have to remember that everybody is unique in the way in which they respond to things and something you said earlier art about the idea that this might be anxiety producing. For some people, the amount of structure will be comfort thing that is that it provides a guide rail for them that is helpful and gives them direction that they unfortunately don&#8217;t want to have to create or provide for themselves in the moment. So it&#8217;s just like, if I was taking off as an astronaut, while I&#8217;m in the Shuttle, I want very clear instructions that are granular, press the red button, press the green button, press the blue button, right, I don&#8217;t want to have to think Wait, you know, yesterday, we kind of turned the dial some little bit to the left, I want to know exactly where I should do and what I should do it at that time in those critical moments. But there are other times where I probably don&#8217;t want as much structure and control because I want to be able to be a little bit more say, let&#8217;s use the word creative or intuitive. In those moments, I&#8217;m going to then, you know, lean into, you know, less of my executive function and a little bit more of some other part of my brain. And that gives me that level of kind of balance. And I think everybody&#8217;s a little bit different. And I think not only are we different, generally, we can be different in these very specific cases, to the point Francis was making earlier about being in a in a hyperactive mode, right, where you have this very clear set of activities that need to be done toward an important purpose right this moment. And therefore, the time is a little bit more structured, because every moment counts. And I think that that&#8217;s an important kind of piece to this whole puzzle. I will note that you know, something that David Sparks hints at here in the articles that we&#8217;re talking about, is that again, well, let me start back with with it, if we make the premise is hyper scheduling nothing more than time blocking with a different name, I think I can get on board with that. I think that there are so many different types of of time blocking and time chunking, we&#8217;ve already had episodes on those topics. The reality is, is that he&#8217;s just using a different term for what I think is the same thing. And I think I agree with Francis in that sense. What he blends in here and makes a good argument about is that, for the most part, time blocking works for a lot of people for many people. And it&#8217;s important to recognize that component, it may not work for everybody. And for those people, they need to find other methodologies that do support their working capabilities. They&#8217;re working trends. And I think that&#8217;s also a good component to having a good productivity system is to kick the tires until you find the thing that does support you. One of the things that he found to be one of the criticisms that he wrote about and I thought this was really interesting, was, you know, for those people that was basically, you know, this is just basically a controlled type of procrastination, or that hyper scheduling is unrealistic. My question for you all is for the person who always has something that they want to do, where does this process breakdown? Because if the reality is, is that anytime something is not in the calendar, but I still have things that I want to accomplish, the idea of having all of this time blocked, so to speak, I&#8217;m always going to fill it with something that I want to be don&#8217;t doing. So where does the system break down in terms of taking time off? Or maybe having open spaces? Where do you find that the system is not particularly the idea of time blocking will ultimately fail, you wear those failure points for the person who finds themselves looking at a time blocking scenario and thinking, well, even if I block time off or a break, I&#8217;m still going to feel that sense that something needs to be done.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 23:48<br>That compelling notion of always feeling like something has to be done, I don&#8217;t know is necessarily driven by time blocking and hyper scheduling. But it&#8217;s facilitated. It&#8217;s certainly enabled by it. Because you feel like if you if you dig into this deep and you you buy into this deep and then you look at an open calendar. Your first reaction is I need to fill that calendar. Why? Why do I have such big open time blocks, I can put stuff in there, I can be doing things. It&#8217;s not giving you the permission to say, No, I&#8217;m not going to do anything right now. Not not going to go down that path. So it creates a reinforced herbal structure. And this is where I brought up my anxiety point earlier. For people who struggle with executive functions for people who struggle with focus challenges. It can be very difficult because you look at that artificially generated schedule that&#8217;s staring at you. And all of a sudden, a small changes now put it off the rails. There&#8217;s your anxiety right there. How do I get it back on the rails? You know, am I not doing the right thing? Am I not Good at what I&#8217;m doing, because I can&#8217;t follow this basic schedule. That&#8217;s what makes this difficult. So where I see something like a hyper schedule could be useful, is in that same context that when it doesn&#8217;t, I know I sound like I&#8217;m saying both things. But for people who really struggle with trying to keep things on track, it can provide those guardrails. But there has to be a limit, there has to be a balancing point. Or else you wind up again, just working your schedule, not actually working,</p> <p>Francis Wade 25:35<br>you asked about mistakes, I think there&#8217;s a technique that you could that people can use in all situations, and that is to schedule in unscheduled time. And that&#8217;s not the same as a black calendar, a black Canada, a blank calendar says, my priorities are reflected in this tool. It doesn&#8217;t mean that you have any flexibility at all, or it doesn&#8217;t mean that you&#8217;re not working, it doesn&#8217;t mean that you don&#8217;t have a lot to do, it just means that in this tool, my priorities are not being captured. I think the next step sort of to go along with the artists thing is that if you do plan to take time off, or if you do plan to be extremely flexible, or if you do plan to be on vacation, and to schedule, nothing, it&#8217;s better to schedule nothing, rather than to leave nothing scheduled. In other words, you block out the whole day, and you just say, vacation starts at 6am. And it ends up 10pm. And you put a big little block in there. And you don&#8217;t think about it again after that. That&#8217;s better than having a blank calendar. So if you take that extreme and pass it into the regular every day, each day, I have a an on a scheduled block of unscheduled activity, I could use it to rest, I could use it as a buffer in case anything crazy comes in. On some days, lots of crazy comes in. So if I&#8217;m smart at putting in more buffer time than less, on some days, there is no buffer time whatsoever, because everything is scheduled. But the the idea of putting in a buffer zone, put I&#8217;m gonna be putting in I don&#8217;t mean, and this is I think a mistake that people make when they talk about time blocking. They say, in their mind, they instantly translate unscheduled time into buffer time. Which is not the same as scheduled in scheduling in buffer time. buffer time is a tool from as industrial engineer it for us. Buffer is not just stuff you&#8217;re not thinking about, but for something that you actively manage. And I think the same is true for us a calendar, the time you&#8217;re not scheduling, if you actively manage it, you get a different result than if you just start from MTN just keep filling until it&#8217;s full. That&#8217;s a very different mindset than seeing and putting aside extra unscheduled time in this very deliberate way. I think the two are very different.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 28:19<br>I definitely agree. And I think it&#8217;s important. I know we referenced this in the episode on getting more out of your calendar. But you know, I adhere to the Unschedule, which is the Dr. Neil Fiore concept. And I&#8217;ll link to that again in this as well, in the show notes just for for everybody&#8217;s edification. But the idea here is that knowing what you&#8217;re doing, even when what you&#8217;re doing is not what you think as being highly productive energy. expending work is still important. I liked the way in which you phrased it, Francis, which is that, you know, controlling your time is as important being aware of the time that you&#8217;re not going to be controlling you get some better benefit out of it.</p> <p>Unknown Speaker 29:03<br>So I think is important, what Francis is saying, in many cases, you know, and I, I&#8217;m a big fan of color, so I have things on. On my calendar, there is a white calendar. Okay, that is what I called things to know. Okay, cool to know. And there are things that I want to have on the calendar, FYI, that I have not committed yet, but I want them there and I want them to block the time, or at least to have the time and consider but there is other things as</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 29:35<br>Francis was saying that are on my calendar on different colors. There is a black calendar in there, okay, for things that should have that, hey, I need to make sure that my email gets clean and process due that time is respected every day. No, but it&#8217;s good to know it is there. Okay. Do I have a scheduled meeting so that times yes, I have. But again, it is important to have that time in there. So that way, you can recalibrate and recalibrate appropriately. So I think that&#8217;s one thing where the calendar can be used much better into, which is not necessarily time you have committed or you&#8217;re rigid, but it&#8217;s the only way it&#8217;s going to happen as maybe a meeting, but it&#8217;s things that are going to make your day flow much better. You know, I blogged a Friday, once a month, for an afternoon over Friday, because the third Friday of the month, I tried to block that afternoon. Do that means I don&#8217;t work that afternoon. That&#8217;s so I can catch up on what has happened on the week prior. So do I work most of those Fridays I end up working? Okay. But what it is, is there is no meetings, no surprise, I call and then I know I can program so I can work into a much more calm state.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 30:57<br>So I wanted to do as we as we come to the latter part of the episode is to talk about how you would manifest if you were to do this kind of hyper scheduling, which is more granular scheduling than, say, the traditional time blocking concept in let&#8217;s just take it as time blocking as well. So if you were going to do that, how would you do this level of? Let me restate that. If we were going to take the the notion that David Sparks is talking about here and do hyper scheduling, which is more granular scheduling into your system? How would you do that? What would be the method or mechanisms and tools you would use to make that happen? Would you use paper and pen? Would you use a calendar application? Would you use a spreadsheet, I&#8217;m curious what the what the functional makeup of your tools would be? If you were to do this,</p> <p>Francis Wade 31:53<br>I want someone to invent. I don&#8217;t even know what I&#8217;m talking about what I&#8217;m actually imagining. But there&#8217;s a space beside my laptop, right? An A, it has my phone, it has some papers that I catch, I write things on when I&#8217;m moving quickly. I want my calendar to be in that space, I want to press a button, and I want it to appear. And I want to take a stylus or a pen and I just want to write on it. And then I want to hit a button and have it disappear. I don&#8217;t want to tablet tablet, I don&#8217;t want to the screen, I don&#8217;t have to type I don&#8217;t have to click, I just want to be able to get in and out of it as fast as possible. So an interface that is instantly available that doesn&#8217;t require a keyboard doesn&#8217;t require most, and just gets gets me in and out in two or three minutes. And if I could just move things around at will. I don&#8217;t want I don&#8217;t want the force of another device. But the current devices are difficult.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 32:58<br>Do you want it to be a device? You don&#8217;t want it to be a device? No. So another device? Okay, so you got a yellow legal pad and a pen at this point. That&#8217;s the only other option you got there. Francis, where else do you want that to go, I want better than that. You can&#8217;t have both It either has batteries or it doesn&#8217;t.</p> <p>Francis Wade 33:17<br>You know, I saw I saw I saw I saw</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 33:21<br>you want a boogie board. You want one of the dry erase boards. Because that&#8217;s basically what you&#8217;re describing. Okay.</p> <p>Francis Wade 33:30<br>Now I want it to be right beside my laptop.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 33:33<br>I&#8217;m confused. I want it</p> <p>Francis Wade 33:35<br>represent my laptop. But I saw I saw I saw an app, a device. So device but it&#8217;s an invisible device that projects onto your desk. So if I could get something that could project my schedule onto my desk, and I could manipulate it right there and then without having to open anything pick up a physical object, but I could just do it on the fly and then dismiss it.</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 33:59<br>Or you were watching the Marvel Universe this weekend. That sounds something Tony Stark will have built but I haven&#8217;t seen it in any store that I can buy.</p> <p>Francis Wade 34:08<br>I need one of those</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 34:10<br>first piece of junk mail you get covers up your calendar as soon as you throw it on your desk. So are your coffee mug is sitting on top of it.</p> <p>Francis Wade 34:18<br>I want to press a button and have it go away. So I want it there when I want it. I want to press a button then have the regular desk just</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 34:24<br>Okay, so aside from the sound effects and the non existent technology I&#8217;m looking at the setup that I have right here I have a tablet to my left, that has my calendar displayed on it, that I can just interact with the stylus and I can just tap and open things and close things and see what&#8217;s going on at any given time. But how is that any different than just keeping your calendar in a window on your desktop? It all comes down to accessibility doesn&#8217;t it? Yeah,</p> <p>Francis Wade 34:59<br>that&#8217;s it. So that&#8217;s, I would use a tablet too. But there&#8217;s, there&#8217;s no space beside my laptop, or, or it&#8217;s limited or a full tablet, I don&#8217;t want it there. Just to manage my calendar, it&#8217;s too much device for a single applicant doesn&#8217;t</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 35:15<br>have to be. I mean, like I said, the tablet that I&#8217;ve got set up here, and I&#8217;m not advocating just a tablet, I&#8217;m just saying, because it&#8217;s another screen, and it&#8217;s a little screen. In this case, it&#8217;s a 10 inch screen. I can do all kinds of stuff on it, I can pull my notes up, I can access everything else, because it&#8217;s all synchronized in the cloud. But for the purposes of what we&#8217;re discussing, it&#8217;s very useful for that kind of calendar display. And if I was going to operate digitally, for this hyper scheduling, that would probably be the way I would do it. And the reason why I say that is is because the calendar that I have on that tablet, I can also ask access from my desktop. So if I&#8217;m sitting in Outlook, and I add something to the calendar there, it appears on this magical little display to my left. So I know that stuff&#8217;s being tracked and being taken care of. I&#8217;ve seen it where you thought about it, I mean, it, it works fairly well, I mean, especially if you&#8217;re in a setup where you have dual monitors or something like that, again, we&#8217;re talking about opportunities to have, you know, again, an expanded amount of tech. But you could flip it around just as easy. You can have just take your you know, your legal pad and write down your schedule for the day and just lay it off to the side, the only hang up I have is everything has to be on the right side, because I&#8217;m so right handed, my left sides useless. But that that kind of thing, makes it easy to at least track if I</p> <p>Francis Wade 36:45<br>could get if I could get an arm from my tablet with my calendar on it, that&#8217;s similar to what so it&#8217;s not laying on my desk and taking up precious real estate,</p> <p>Augusto Pinaud 36:54<br>I have two layers. So there is a layer on the top where the camera that we&#8217;re going to talk talking right now. Yeah. And I have an arm that that has the devices. So I have a device where during the work day when I&#8217;m sitting in here, my iPad Mini basically works as a calendar. And it says a screen split calendar and a half and to do is on the other half or not the team&#8217;s depending what I&#8217;m working on. But that&#8217;s the only function of that device during the day where if I&#8217;m not in a conference call, it&#8217;s that if the only moment it changes when I&#8217;m doing a video call, because that&#8217;s where I&#8217;m doing the vehicles, I&#8217;m happy to present. But it&#8217;s a tablet, it&#8217;s an iPad, in my case, it&#8217;s an app inside iPad,</p> <p>Francis Wade 37:39<br>I send you my address.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 37:42<br>My concern with any of these types of technologies is that for me, particularly if it&#8217;s out of sight, out of mind, and so I am very fixed on the activity that I&#8217;m doing. And we&#8217;re as some people think about the the problems with multitasking, I am a single Tasker to a fault. And so you know, like if there are other things going on, I&#8217;m I am, I am processing a single thread at any given time. And I don&#8217;t like to be interrupted in that thread. Even when other people come to me with other issues, I have to stop them because the thread that I&#8217;m on needs to be completed before I will convert to that next thread. And not only do I do that purposefully, but I just am predisposed to that. And so what I try to do as much as possible is to give myself cues, that shifting needs to happen at some point, so that I can start to decelerate and do the acceleration on the other side. And so having multiple screens have those things available to me is really helpful. So to your challenge, Francis, akin to what I think art is talking about here is that I have this second device here with the calendar, and task managers and project managers to the side here. So my primary work is being done in front of me. But I always have off to the side, this particular machine that is just running calendars, tasks, projects, and otherwise, it&#8217;s always a fingertip away, and I have it so that the screen just turns off after a few minutes. And then if I ever wanted I just tap the screen it activates again and all those things are there and available. So it&#8217;s a useful premise to have that there. Just so that you&#8217;re capable of like, okay, what&#8217;s the next thing that needs to happen? Great. I can check that off. And I also am a big fan of this is why I continue to use Remember The Milk I have Remember The Milk take over the entire screen for the singular task I&#8217;m working on so that I cannot see any of the other tasks. And so I actually have But just do that one thing in front of me. So I have it just take over the whole screen. That&#8217;s the only thing appearing on the screen. I don&#8217;t want any other distractions. And that also allows me to annotate that task as I&#8217;m working. So as I&#8217;m working on something, I can just reach over and type a few words as to what is going on with this particular tasks such that if I do get interrupted, then I can switch gears quickly. But I know where I left, left off, because the task was open and available to me to annotate as I was making my way through. So that really allows for that switching, that is for me necessary. It&#8217;s just not my natural skill set. It&#8217;s not something that I lean into, in terms of of things. And I know that a lot of people are natural multitaskers, so to speak, I am not one of those people. And I don&#8217;t like doing it. And I feel like it makes me less productive on top of all these things. So it&#8217;s not only a principled approach, but it also happens to be my natural way of being. And this gives me at least some modicum of control in that space.</p> <p>Art Gelwicks 41:04<br>My phone is set up now on my right hand side, and the only thing that&#8217;s displaying is my calendar. And I have that the Calendar block shown up and I have it just in the day view that I can see exactly what&#8217;s coming up on my calendar just on my phone, and it&#8217;s out of the way</p> <p>Francis Wade 41:18<br>in that in that candle stand up.</p> <p>Unknown Speaker 41:20<br>Exactly. It&#8217;s just a desk doc.</p> <p>Francis Wade 41:22<br>On the desk. Yeah, just little desktop desktop. Okay. Here&#8217;s the other thing. I&#8217;d love to have Hamada voice interface for the calendar. It&#8217;s called Google Assistant appointment to four o&#8217;clock Google will do that.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 41:34<br>Yeah, Google&#8217;s Google definitely has your back there. Yeah, Google can do all of that. Today. It was to me, can I</p> <p>Francis Wade 41:39<br>take a current status? Here, you can see a schedule scheduled time to work on the paper at four</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 41:44<br>o&#8217;clock? Yes.</p> <p>Francis Wade 41:45<br>I&#8217;ve tried. I&#8217;ve tried Google. Is it a system on my on my Android phone? Yes. Well, that&#8217;s all that this takes me to a whole new realm of opportunity and possibility. Thanks, guys.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 41:57<br>So that folks kind of have an idea when when you ask the assistant to do certain things, you are asking them on kind of three levels. One is you can enter something into the calendar. And so you can just say, you know, you know, schedule this particular thing, then you can ask it to remind you to do something, and that, you know, remind me to is a trigger for it to create a task to remind you to do something at that particular time. And then of course, there&#8217;s the setting of timers, you can name those timers. So that you can say I want to be done with something by X amount of time, or I need to shift gears and leave for my next meeting by X amount of time. And so you can tell it, you know, set a timer called, and then whatever you want to call it, I find that to be really useful. Because it&#8217;s not about starting something at some point, it&#8217;s about ending something at some point. And that helps you shift. So I can have something end and trigger me and then I know Okay, now I 15 or 20 minutes to get to the next place. So I need to wrap up what I&#8217;m doing right now and make that transition. And then that next calendar event is there waiting for me. So you can you have all three of those things all done by voice from within the assistant.</p> <p>Francis Wade 43:10<br>Or I welcome I work on an article on this because I&#8217;ve never I would love to.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 43:15<br>I will put links to all of the support articles for Google into the show notes for everybody. Yeah, it&#8217;s very, very hard tried</p> <p>Francis Wade 43:21<br>Google assistant in a while, because when I tried to do the things I&#8217;m talking about a few years ago, I was like, got it. It was I couldn&#8217;t figure out how to do it. And I gave up and I said this is only good for running, opening an app and doing basic stuff. And I quit.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 43:36<br>It has come it has come a long way. All right. Any final thoughts for folks about hyper scheduling and tools associated with hyper scheduling?</p> <p>Unknown Speaker 43:44<br>Yes, I, I wanted to, I think you make a great point that this kitchen is key. But also part of that hyper scheduling and time blocking is people tend to think and this is when I need to work. And one of the things that are key is how you&#8217;re going to manage those transition points that we had just discussed the end, it is really important. Okay, when is the next transition point and how I&#8217;m transitioning from this point to the next one. And I think there is not enough time on in most people have not spent enough time really perfecting that transition point. So they come and work the blogs but then the blocks doesn&#8217;t work because they get stuck into the process or the process prior gets a little bit longer. So it is really important to make sure that you work into both the transition points how they should end and how the next one should is should start.</p> <p>Raymond Sidney-Smith 44:47<br>I will close out with just a little bit of conversation on the idea of perseverance when it comes to any level of time blocking or hyper scheduling or otherwise. It&#8217;s very easy to create a schedule and then And, as David Sparks talks about, you know, change, things change, and therefore you move them around. But if you move them around too much, then there comes a sense of, Well, nothing is really fixed, fixed. So I can just do anything whenever, and therefore you start to procrastinate or just play Tetris with your calendar for the sake of it, it becomes a game for it becomes illusory. And that is not necessarily useful to you. So if you do feel the sense of something appears in your calendar, and you feel that level of resistance to doing it, lean into the resistance, be uncomfortable for a little while and work through it, your brain is a very good energy saving device, and it likes to save energy. And so it will just say, Okay, let&#8217;s do nothing as opposed to doing that thing. But if you if you just stay with it long enough, give it a few minutes. And you will see that if you just take action, you will inevitably find momentum with regard to those blocks of time. And that&#8217;s very, very powerful to just overcoming that inertia, so to speak, when it comes to being productive. And that will make your time blocking more effective over time. And that, of course, will then reinforce you overcoming any levels of procrastination in the moment that you might find. And so good luck with that. And so this brings us to the end of our conversation, but certainly not the end of the discussion. So if any of you would like, you can head over to the Podcast, episode [email protected]. There on the podcast website at the bottom of the page, you can leave a comment or question. And of course, we read all of your questions and comments. And if there&#8217;s a response necessary, we will go ahead and do that. You can always find every episode by the three digit number. So if you go to productivitycast.net, forward slash 001, you will get to Episode One, Episode 2002, and so on and so forth. So feel free to find those on each episode page, you&#8217;ll find our show notes, you&#8217;ll find links to any of the things that we discussed. And also text transcripts the both in a readable format that you could just expand and read on the page, as well as one that you can download as a PDF. I want to express my thanks to Augusto Pinaud<br>, Francis Wade and Art Gelwicks for joining me here on ProductivityCast Each week, you can learn more about them and their work by visiting productivitycast.net too. I&#8217;m Ray Sidney-Smith on behalf of all of us here at ProductivityCast Here&#8217;s to your productive life.</p> <p>Voiceover Artist 47:36<br>And that&#8217;s it for this productivity cast, the weekly show about all things productivity with your hosts, Ray Sidney-Smith and Augusto Pinaud with Francis Wade and Art Gelwicks.</p> <p></div> <p><a href="https://productivitycast.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2023/02/137-hyper-scheduling-productivitycast_otter_ai.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Download a PDF of raw, text transcript of the interview here.</a></p>
play-circle icon
47 MIN