Category: Scheduling

Posted on

Hard Thinking in a Busy Schedule

I found another of Cal Newport’s gems that fits quite well into the 2Time way of thinking.  Getting Creative Things Done: How to Fit Hard Thinking into a Busy Schedule.

In this post he makes the point that the best way to get quality, creative work done is to set aside dedicated time in one’s schedule, which is the equivalent of 2Time’s Orange Belt level of skill in Scheduling.

The only difference of opinion I have with this excellent article is that it’s not only about hard, creative work that academics do.  Business professionals at all levels aren’t simply paid to do something without thinking.  Instead, managers hope that they are also working on their job, not just in their job… improving it, streamlining it, cutting costs, etc.

This kind of continuous improvement comes from using the kind of techniques he describes, which means that this skill has much wider implications on professional productivity than he indicates.

Here it is again:  Getting Creative Things Done: How to Fit Hard Thinking into a Busy Schedule

Posted on

Makers vs. Managers

This is an interesting essay from Paul Graham that describes two very different mindsets to how one’s time is used throughout the day.

He distinguishes between managers who move from one activity to another from creators/makers who need to have large amounts of time to innovate.   Managers think in terms of hours, while creators think in terms of half days.

It’s an interesting concept, but I don’t believe it’s as cut and dry as he suggests.  Instead, I’d say that ineffective managers don’t create anything, and run around from one fire to another.  Those who are effective set time aside to creatively make things better, and they do it routinely.  They prevent problems from happening by virtue of the advanced problem-solving that they do, and are known for doing the kind of long-range planning that’s the cornerstone of good management.

Nevertheless, the way in which managers and makers think is different (even if it shouldn’t be) and he does a good job of separating the two.

Maker’s Schedule, Manager’s Schedule – click here to read the article.

Posted on

A Fascinating Account of Improvement

I read an interesting post written by Cal Newport over at the 99% blog entitled “A Day Without Distraction: Lessons Learned from 12 Hours of Forced Focus.”

The author makes a significant change in his time management system, by adopting the practice of working only in 30 minute increments.

While the 30 minute block is an arbitrary one there are some powerful lessons that he shares from scheduling a day in advance, and then executing it accordingly.  He calls the process he used “batching.”

At the end of the day, he finds himself in the flow state for extended periods of time, which is a must for professionals who do knowledge work.  On the other hand, he has a hard time implementing the practice, as it flies in the face of many of his established and unconscious habits.

This echoes what I have found in my research, and say in my classes.  The skill of Scheduling is critical to entering into the flow state in today’s working world.  There are simply too many distractions to contend with, and it takes time and advanced planning to have all the items necessary in order to start.

Here’s the link once again:  A Day Without Distraction: Lessons Learned from 12 Hours of Forced Focus.

Posted on

New Terminology for Scheduling

Now and then I find that here on 2Time I am forced to craft a new word for a concept that doesn’t quite have the right definition.  For example, “time demand” is a phrase I had to coin in the absence of any other, to describe the basic unit of stuff that we deal with every day.

I need another term to describe a “booked” period of time in one’s schedule.

If you are new to this site, you may not know that a time demand is Captured and Emptied into one of several places.  A schedule is one possible destination for a newly Emptied time demand.

Once it gets placed in a schedule, it can either be “hard” or “soft” depending on what other time demands depends on its completion, and what consequences occur if the action fails to occur.  It gets transformed from it’s original status as a free-floating commitment, and now has the following characteristics:
– a clear description of the action to be taken (and hopefully a clear understanding of the outcome)
– a start-time
– and expected end-time (and therefore a duration)

These are the basics, but there are other important attributes that usually aren’t captured in one’s schedule, such as:
– dependencies in both directions
– other people who may be participating
– location
– importance
– dollar costs
– consequences if it’s not completed
– the degree to which the time estimate is unbiased
– the distribution of the estimate

The problem I have is I don’t have a name or word for a scheduled time demand.  Here are a few I have tried:

Appointment — this is OK for White Belts who only record meetings with others in their calendars, but it becomes a problem for Yellow and Orange Belts.  When they need to schedule a solo activity they are forced to talk about “appointments with themselves”… which simply sounds weird, if not a bit tacky.

Occasion — let’s see, where is my black tie?  This isn’t a bad one, but it sounds a little official, and doesn’t conjure up everyday time demands like doing the laundry, which definitely isn’t anything special.

Time-slot — a bit dry, I have used this term more frequently, even though it sounds as if some decision has been pre-determined to some degree.

Designated time / time period / time-gap — these all sound clunky and have a bit of the pre-determination that time-slot carries.

Space — sounds too much like something physical rather then temporal.

Segment — promising…  I am thinking of the term in radio or television terms, in which a certain period of time is used for a particular program.  The only part I don’t like is that the word “segment” seems to imply that the time-period it describes is being used for something particular, when in fact it might not be used at all.

The winner is… “segment.”  Unless someone can come up with a better term!  Let me know if you have a suggestion.

Posted on

Time to Have a Girlfriend

A few years ago when I was struggling in a first marriage that ultimately failed, I came across some advice that I have never forgotten.  It was simple and brutal – if you want your relationship to last, spend 15 hours per week in face to face contact with your spouse.  (See www.marriagebuilders.com for details.)

Not time spent sleeping, watching television or taking care of the kids.  Face to face time.  The kind that allows for conversation and interaction.

He made a good point — when you are dating, you make sure to spend this kind of time to get to know the other person, and you actually engage in certain practices that allow you to fall deeply in love.  He argues that these practices, and their duration, is what allows a relationship to develop.  When they cease, the relationship suffers and eventually dies.

In most marriages, other commitments come into play that reduce the number significantly — kids, work, hobbies, charities, church, chores, sports, television, games, Internet activity.  Over time, the total number of hours shrinks as both partners unknowingly drift to other interests.  Before you know it, each partner has developed a raft of other commitments that serve to keep them apart.

It was a compelling argument, but I had the reaction that most people have when they hear the 15 hour required minimum.  “Where the heck will I ever find that kind of time?”  It seemed to be an impossible task to squeeze that much time in, and I had the stupid notion that time with one’s spouse shouldn’t be forced… which only meant attempting to squeeze the time in between other, presumably more important, commitments.

The author argued that this was a cop-out.  He asked his readers to imagine what would happen if they were to fall in love with someone outside the marriage, and were to conduct a torrid and passionate affair.

If you are a fan of the television series Mad Men you would see a good example of how the busiest people in the world are able to find time to have affairs, and I imagine that you and I are not too different.  15 hours a week on our secret love affair would feel like no time at all, and we’d magically find ways to be together that seem so hard once our lover becomes our spouse, and a few years have passed.

In my second marriage I have worked hard from the beginning to make sure that the 15 hour minimum is preserved, and I schedule time with my wife when I find that the minimum is being threatened.  Some married folk in my time management classes argue that setting time aside to date your spouse isn’t romantic, but they ignore the fact that if they were to conduct an illicit affair, that high level scheduling skills would be an absolute requirement!

They also forget that when they were dating, coordinating schedules was an absolute requirement, and that we all make the mistake in thinking that once we are married, such dedicated time will come easily and effortlessly, without planning and foresight.  Sex should happen spontaneously, right after doing the dishes and changing the baby’s diaper.

Once convinced, however, of the need for 15 hours, finding the time is often a huge challenge.  Those with White belt skills in Scheduling, for example, are likely to find the going tough in spite of their best intentions.  Their best tactic is to upgrade their skills in this area to Yellow or Orange belt levels, so that they can handle this new 15 hour per week time demand that seems to be such an imposing burden.

It seems a bit strange that time management skills might have something to do with saving a marriage.  However, if we look at the things that don’t happen in life because we don’t have the time (such as more exercise, less clutter and better balance) it’s not hard to see that doing well in all of them requires good a time-management skills.

Posted on

Schedule and Forget It

One of the benefits of having a higher belt (Orange and Green) and switching time demands from lists to a single schedule is that there is a certain peace of mind that’s available.

This is especially true for a high number of time demands.

The reason for peace of mind is simple, and it starts at the moment when a time demand is Emptied from a Capture Point.  If the time demand is converted to a segment in your Schedule, then you have set time aside in the future to get it done.

If the time demand is added to a List, then you have also implicitly set time aside to get the item done in the future, but there is a major difference from the prior option.

When the item is added to a Schedule, you can forget about it until the date/time approaches as long as you have a reliable method for interrupting what you’re doing to remind yourself to get started.

By contrast, when the item is added to a List, something a bit dangerous happens after it’s added:
1.  you make a mental note to yourself of the time that it’s due, or the completion date that would represent a late one
2.  you start to make an effort to remember this due date
3.  when you check your list each day, you must revisit the item to ensure that the due date hasn’t passed, redoubling your effort to remember

The overall effect is that you must revisit the List to check on the item, much in the way that a mother fusses over her baby while it’s sleeping.   This fussing isn’t a problem when the number of time demands is small, but when the total number of items in a List exceeds a certain number, the technique becomes counter-productive.

That’s when we need the relief and peace of mind that Scheduling affords.  The moral of the story is that when the number of time demands grows past a certain point, then it’s better to “Schedule and Forget It” rather than “List and Fuss Over It.”

Posted on

Hard vs Soft Scheduled Items

Professionals who undertake the discipline of Scheduling at higher skill levels (Orange and Green belts) have their calendar as the central point of focus (rather than their memory, or lists of different varieties.)

They place most activities directly into an available time-slot, immediately assigning it a date, duration and start-time. In so doing, they are able to forget about the time demand until the appropriate “appointment” comes up.

These users do use their calendars flexibly, moving items depending on what happens each day. They make these changes on the fly, using electronic tools like Outlook in a way that goes well beyond the intent of its designers. As a result, they have developed some special needs.

One feature that would make things easier would be a way to schedule “hard” vs “soft” segments in the calendar.

Essentially, Outlook tries to treat each item in its calendar as an appointment: a timed meeting that involves another person such as a dinner date or a meeting with a customer. However, Orange and Green belts also schedule individual activities, dubbed by some as “appointments with yourself.” The vast majority of these items involve no other people.

However, these two commitments are not exactly alike.

Their lives would be made much easier if Outlook were to distinguish between different kinds of segments, recognizing them as either “hard” or “soft.”

A hard item is one that has external consequences if the start and/or end-times change. Many involve activities with other people who rely on our presence, and have some expectation regarding the other person’s attendance. These segments cannot be changed unilaterally.

A soft item is one that only involves the user, and can easily be moved around one’s calendar, with few immediate consequences. They might have great importance, but a late start would not endanger the end result.

Given these differences, programs like Outlook could help users to “protect” hard segments by making it more difficult for them to be double-booked or deleted, and also by giving them stronger reminders with different pop-ups and audible sounds. Colour coding would also help to separate them from other segments in a user’s calendar.

This would help users to manage the two kind of segments differently, in keeping with their distinct functions.

Posted on

Balancing Your Life

A interesting article over at the LifeHacker website.

Penelope Trunk is a great writer and in this article she talks about the power of creating a balanced schedule and sticking to it.  Also, she talks about the difference between working lots and lots of hours, and instead trying to put in high quality work at all time.

This is the very opposite of jumping to answer your cell-phone whenever it rings or checking email whenever it beeps because it just might be something more important than what you happen to doing at the moment (like reading my blog.)

Click here to read:  Find Time Your Personal and Get a Handle on Your Out-of-Control Work Schedule.”

Posted on

Do time management programs achieve their objectives?

This article doesn’t quite go far enough, but it gives some food for thought.

The bottom line is that professionals who are good at time management are also good at estimating the time it takes to complete tasks.  As far as I can tell, those who wield schedules rather than lists would naturally fall in that category as they have at least decided to include the practice of time estimating as a daily habit.

Click here to read: Pitting their wits against the clock