3 ms·

I read the FVP post [1]...I'm slightly incredulous: it's just a list. That you scan and pick things from. I'm not sure if I should be impressed or underwhelmed

by stephen 11y ago

I read the FVP post [1]...I'm slightly incredulous: it's just a list. That you scan and pick things from. I'm not sure if I should be impressed or underwhelmed at the simplicity. There are no categories, no contexts, no markers, no due dates... I'm not sure what makes this is a "system". What's odd is that the author seems to have had previous incarnations/systems, that were actually more complex, e.g. had separate lists with review periods, curation, etc., but he seems to have evolved (which I really appreciate continual improvement) to "fuck it, just use one list". I know I'm committing an error of logic, but his FVP stats seem to indicate he's basically retired/in a low stress environment [2], so perhaps all the regalia of GTD (which fwiw I don't practice) are more applicable in the corporate environments that spawned it. However, if it works for you, that's great. It's been awhile since I've poked around in the "productivity system" space. Interesting stuff. [1]: http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2015/5/21/the-final-version-perfected-fvp.html http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2015/5/21/the-final-... [2]: http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2015/5/27/a-day-with-fvp.html http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2015/5/27/a-day-with...

VladimirGolovin 11y ago
What makes FVP a system, and what makes it stand out in comparison with GTD, is its emphasis on psychological readiness. Here's a quote from [1]: There are three main requirements which have to be kept in balance. These are urgency, importance and psychological readiness. Traditional time management systems have tended to concentrate on the first two of these. The neglect of psychological readiness is probably the reason that most people don’t find time management systems particularly effective or congenial. The most distinctive feature of FVP is the way that its algorithm is primarily based on psychological readiness - this then opens the way to keeping urgency and importance in the best achievable balance. In GTD, at least how I understand it, prioritization is rational and conscious. In Autofocus / FVP, prioritization is based on your 'gut feeling' towards the task at the moment when you look at it. This was a crucial difference in my case. (As for due dates, the author explicitly states that his systems are incapable of handling dateful tasks).

by stephen 11y ago

VladimirGolovin 11y ago

What makes FVP a system, and what makes it stand out in comparison with GTD, is its emphasis on psychological readiness. Here's a quote from [1]: There are three main requirements which have to be kept in balance. These are urgency, importance and psychological readiness. Traditional time management systems have tended to concentrate on the first two of these. The neglect of psychological readiness is probably the reason that most people don’t find time management systems particularly effective or congenial. The most distinctive feature of FVP is the way that its algorithm is primarily based on psychological readiness - this then opens the way to keeping urgency and importance in the best achievable balance. In GTD, at least how I understand it, prioritization is rational and conscious. In Autofocus / FVP, prioritization is based on your 'gut feeling' towards the task at the moment when you look at it. This was a crucial difference in my case. (As for due dates, the author explicitly states that his systems are incapable of handling dateful tasks).