4 ms·

Eisenhower method is all you need. Decide if something is urgent, and if it is important. Urgent and important? Do it. Urgent and not important? Delegate it.

Eisenhower method is all you need. Decide if something is urgent, and if it is important. Urgent and important? Do it. Urgent and not important? Delegate it. Not urgent and important? Schedule it. Not urgent and not important? Bin. Lots of things that are urgent and important? Choose 1 thing. Do it. Then do the next one. I read 4000 Weeks by Oliver Burkeman recently. TLDR: embrace you don't have time for it all, and if you try and optimise you'll just create more work for yourself. Get rid of as much as you can as a first step. It definitely doesn't need maths. If it does, you're optimising for the wrong thing.

Swizec 4y ago
Do less. Focus on the things you care about.
- doitLP 4y ago
  If you don’t know what you care about, spend time figuring that out first, even if it takes longer than you feel like it should. A good place to start is Cal Newport’s podcast Deep Questions
d_sem 4y ago
I've seen this four quadrant method frequently referenced, most recently I came across it in David Allen's book "Getting Things Done". I don't quite understand the logic behind delegating non-urgent and important work. Two points of confusion: 1) In business, how do I have the authority to delegate when responsibility is frequently defined by the role/organization or I'm at the bottom of the organization? 2) Delegating urgent not important tasks seems like an ineffective use of valuable resources and a recipe for a toxic working relationship. Rather, I would expect someone to delegate not urgent important work so that there is time to deal with the additional cost of handing off work to another person. What am missing?
- TeMPOraL 4y ago
  For 1), I suspect once you figure out you can just start asking your co-workers to do your stuff, you reach first level of enlightenment and transition from $jobtitle into senior $jobtitle. For 2), the point is to throw the task - and responsibility for completing it - over the wall. That's why it's prescribed for Urgent and Not Important work: urgency is satisfied by you delegating quickly, and if your victim screws up and fails the task, well, no big deal - the task wasn't important anyway. All that to say: yeah, I can't see a way this isn't abusive and antisocial, unless done in business context with clear rules, such as hiring people specifically for you to delegate work to them.
- patmcc 4y ago
  An urgent task needs to be done soon. An important task needs to be done by you. 1) If it's a work task and you're at the bottom of a hierarchy, everything given to you by the boss is 'important' by this definition. 2) It may be important to them - the trick is finding the right person. Taking your kid to a scary dentist appointment is urgent and important; it can't be delayed and it can't be anyone else.

Swizec 4y ago

Do less. Focus on the things you care about.

doitLP 4y ago
If you don’t know what you care about, spend time figuring that out first, even if it takes longer than you feel like it should. A good place to start is Cal Newport’s podcast Deep Questions

d_sem 4y ago

I've seen this four quadrant method frequently referenced, most recently I came across it in David Allen's book "Getting Things Done". I don't quite understand the logic behind delegating non-urgent and important work. Two points of confusion: 1) In business, how do I have the authority to delegate when responsibility is frequently defined by the role/organization or I'm at the bottom of the organization? 2) Delegating urgent not important tasks seems like an ineffective use of valuable resources and a recipe for a toxic working relationship. Rather, I would expect someone to delegate not urgent important work so that there is time to deal with the additional cost of handing off work to another person. What am missing?

TeMPOraL 4y ago
For 1), I suspect once you figure out you can just start asking your co-workers to do your stuff, you reach first level of enlightenment and transition from $jobtitle into senior $jobtitle. For 2), the point is to throw the task - and responsibility for completing it - over the wall. That's why it's prescribed for Urgent and Not Important work: urgency is satisfied by you delegating quickly, and if your victim screws up and fails the task, well, no big deal - the task wasn't important anyway. All that to say: yeah, I can't see a way this isn't abusive and antisocial, unless done in business context with clear rules, such as hiring people specifically for you to delegate work to them.
patmcc 4y ago
An urgent task needs to be done soon. An important task needs to be done by you. 1) If it's a work task and you're at the bottom of a hierarchy, everything given to you by the boss is 'important' by this definition. 2) It may be important to them - the trick is finding the right person. Taking your kid to a scary dentist appointment is urgent and important; it can't be delayed and it can't be anyone else.