Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

2099 Posts in 297 Topics- by 334 Members - Latest Member: VendingGuy

September 02, 2010, 06:12:41 PM
work.life.creativitywork. life. creativityTime Management (Moderator: Stephen Smith)Media watch: the Guardian (UK)
Pages: [1]
Print
Author Topic: Media watch: the Guardian (UK)  (Read 1081 times)
SteveC
White Belt
*

Karma: +1/-0
Posts: 32



View Profile WWW
« on: August 02, 2008, 03:06:34 AM »

Interesting article on time management in the Guardian today...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2008/aug/02/healthandwellbeing.psychology

S

Logged
Tim Glinatsis
White Belt
*

Karma: +5/-0
Posts: 44



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: August 04, 2008, 08:15:05 PM »

Interesting article on time management in the Guardian today...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2008/aug/02/healthandwellbeing.psychology

S



It was interesting until I got to the last paragraph:

Quote
Better yet, where possible, avoid planning altogether. Use the "ready, fire, aim" approach, and correct course as you go along. As the blogger Steve Pavlina points out, the advantage is you quickly start getting real feedback. If you're starting a new business, say, you won't have to imagine how customers might respond to your adverts; you'll know. This approach also helps when it comes to those curious tasks that don't obey Hofstadter's law: the ones you fret about for weeks, but that end up taking 10 minutes. Sometimes, the secret to getting things done is just to do them.

This sounds like the type of rhetoric that you hear from people without real jobs, I'm afraid. Can you imagine pitching a business plan on this premise? How about a business case to stockholders, or a response to your utility company's bill?

There's an interesting nugget in the article, relative to our tendency to underestimate durations...but the answer isn't to ditch planning. The answer is to understand *why* the plans fall short, and drill down to the level of detail where the differences fall short. It's been my experience that plans fail when they lack sufficient detail - not vice versa.

Try this: write out a project plan for "getting ready in the morning." Identify every discreet task, independently of one another, and put a time estimate next to it. Sequence them, and add up the duration.

$20 says that your estimate comes out 40-50% higher than what you ACTUALLY do. Reason? At a certain level of granularity, your planning mind underestimates your execution mind. Seriously. You might guess that it takes you a minute and a half to dry off after getting out of the shower (ladies, forgive me), but in actual practice, it's more like 45 seconds. That's a 45 second difference - but a 100% inaccuracy.

Stacked, it's big.

Consider the massive construction project. So it takes ~6 weeks to pour the foundation. Okay. Drill down another level, and watch what happens. It takes ~1 day to arrange the contract, another day to mark out the lines, two days to acquire concrete...

There's fat in there - guaranteed. But you don't get it until you reach the right level of specificity in your plan.

It's my $.02, but after working in large-scale manufacturing (shipbuilding) for the last six years, and having managed multiple projects of major complexity, I believe this to be 100% true.

*shrug*
Logged

Brad Blackman
Sensei
Global Moderator
Brown Belt
*****

Karma: +3/-0
Posts: 262



View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: August 05, 2008, 11:41:17 AM »

$20 says that your estimate comes out 40-50% higher than what you ACTUALLY do. Reason? At a certain level of granularity, your planning mind underestimates your execution mind. Seriously. You might guess that it takes you a minute and a half to dry off after getting out of the shower (ladies, forgive me), but in actual practice, it's more like 45 seconds. That's a 45 second difference - but a 100% inaccuracy.

I think that's why I was getting so stressed out last week when I wrote out my todo/projects list (that I posted over here). I got about half done on that list, and it wasn't as bad as I thought.
Logged

Brad Blackman
Co-Founder, work.life.creativity
Founder, MysteriousFlame.com
fwade
White Belt
*

Karma: +0/-0
Posts: 9



View Profile WWW
« Reply #3 on: August 28, 2008, 03:46:19 AM »

Tim,

Interesting point:

I think that's why I was getting so stressed out last week when I wrote out my todo/projects list (that I posted over here). I got about half done on that list, and it wasn't as bad as I thought.

I think it goes the other way also, in which people make time estimates that are quite mistaken, as they underestimate the time it takes to do tasks.  In fact, for those that use schedules, my observation is that they tend to overestimate their ability to executive.

The typical case that I see in programmes is that people overpack their schedules, especially when they think believe that tasks are simpler than they are. (Just yesterday, I made this mistake!)

With respect to prioritizing my tasks, I stopped trying to use categories and have adopted the system of scheduling stuff to do at time when I can get it done with high probability.

This prevents having to go back and re-look at a huge list, just to make sure that a low priority item has not become a high priority because the due date is near, or because the environment has changed.

Instead, I deal with the item when it comes up and re-consider it at that moment, decided whether to complete it then or at some other, later time.

This works for the number of discrete time demands I have to deal with.

Logged

Francis Wade
Pages: [1]
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic