Getting things done

This is a post that I promised to a friend a few weeks ago and I’m rather embarrassed that it’s taken so long to show up on the page.

We were chatting about looking for work. I looked for work at the beginning of 2009, and it was an amazing, resounding success – I found a brilliant twelve-month contract at the height of the recession, and started working six weeks after I started looking. I still can’t believe how well it worked out.

This post is not about showing off, and it’s not about saying ‘if you do what I did then you too will find a job within six weeks’. Obviously there are lots of factors at play here. But I do think I got something right, because the way I did this was so different from how I’d have done it in the past. When I left LANDbank, it took me four and a half months to update my CV – this time round I did it in a weekend.

My friend and I were reflecting that job-hunting is psychologically difficult in more than one way. There’s an ego hit in being a job-hunter, and almost all of us have to cope with rejection at some point in the process, even if it’s for a job we didn’t really want. And there’s uncertainty – how long will this go on? Will I run out of money first? And there’s the solitude. For most people, it’s a lot harder to get stuff done on their own than working with others.

This is not completely dissimilar to doing a PhD. I use the lessons that I learned from my job-hunt in my life every day now. Okay, obviously that’s not true. Some days I mess around on the Internet instead. But when I need to get work done, I use them and they continue to pay off for me.

Take small steps, smaller than you would believe possible. This really works.

Here’s what I do left to myself. I make a to-do list for the day that includes the following: ‘read everything in the house that’s thesis-relevant’, ‘make notes about it’, ‘do all the housework’, ‘sort out my tax affairs for the next year’ and ‘broker a peace deal in the Middle East’. Then I do nothing. Then I double the length of the to-do list for the following day because I got nothing done.

Extraordinarily enough, this does not work.

I remember the first time I said to someone ‘I have a hundred items on my to-do list’ and she said ‘just do one today, and then stop’. Just do one today? What’s the point of that? If I just do one today and just do one tomorrow then I’ll never get out of this hole – I’ll end up picking up more actions than I can cross off. But she was right, and after another couple of days of taking no action, I took her advice. I did one thing and then I stopped. Somehow, everything else on the list got done quite quickly after that. Not the same day, but not a hundred days later either.

I don’t know how it works. But I have done it again and again, since then, and it continues to work, and when I’ve suggested it to people I coach, they’ve found that it works for them as well. I say to them ‘do a tenth of what you think you should do every day, and if that doesn’t work, do a twentieth’. It’s non-standard coaching advice, I think. But it works.

Do not do anything alone

I work with a buddy on everything. If I could clone him and give him to everyone who’s reading this, I would do so, because he is the best thing ever and the world could do with more of him. I am unimaginably more effective and productive because he is in my life. I call him if I’m procrastinating. I call him if I’m afraid. I call him if I’m bored. I call him if I’m lonely. I call him when I’ve just realised I’ve wasted half a day on the Internet. I call him if I’m angry. I call him if I don’t know what to do next. I ask him to read draft letters and documents to make sure I’m saying what I want to say. I call him to share failures and successes. He does the same with me.

I do not know how this works, but it is magic. I can get things done with him in my life that I could not begin to do on my own. If by some dreadful chance he disappeared from my life, I would look for another buddy instantly. When he’s on holiday and unavailable, I call other people. Sometimes I make five or six calls a day just to say ‘please help me with my work’. When I started the big contract after two years of not working, I was sending ten to twelve texts a day also. It wasn’t comfortable. I felt inadequate. But I got promoted.

Take amazingly good physical care of yourself

As a culture, we suck at self-care. We are great at self-indulgence, but that’s not the same thing. I’m not knocking self-indulgence – I don’t party much, but I’ve spent much of August reading Jilly Cooper novels. But at the end of self-indulgence, we tend to have less energy and not more. Self-care is about conserving and rebuilding energy.

Self-care is hard. It is, as I say, counter-cultural. Also it is very dull. It requires you to be present, which is hard. It requires self-sacrifice and attention to deferred gratification, which is hard. (Well, I find it hard. Patrick does it as easily as breathing. But I don’t recommend him as a role model. If you give him an Easter Egg in April, he’ll still have some left in June. I spend much of my life trying to be Patrick, and it never works. Things go much better when I try to be me instead.)

This is the first year I’ve been willing to pay conscious attention to self-care, and it is paying off beyond my wildest dreams. (Admittedly it turns out that my wildest dreams are in fact not that wild.) Because…

Here’s the deal

There is an ebb and flow to work. There is an ebb and flow to our bodies. If we start little, we can build up momentum and then suddenly do eight or ten job applications in a day. If we let ourselves rest, we will have energy when we need it. If we go easy on ourselves, getting stuff done can be easy. We can work with the grain instead of against it. If we treat ourselves well, we can feel well-treated. If we treat ourselves with love and respect, we can feel worthy of love and respect. If we let someone share the burden, we can feel supported. If we ask for help with the difficult stuff, we don’t have to do the difficult stuff alone.

This is different from how most people get things done. It’s different from how I’ve done things all my life. But it works for me, and it’s worked for everyone I’ve passed on to. If you have trouble getting stuff done, it might be worth a try.

Advertisement

19 Responses to “Getting things done”

  1. RichardS Says:

    Great post, very helpful, thank you.

    If you have the time, some more info on how the buddy system works would be interesting. Are you not in danger of wrecking the other person’s day, attention-wise? (I find interruptions the worst part of trying to get something done).

    • Francesca Says:

      The buddy system has to be carefully negotiated. It’s different for everyone, and I think the key to success is probably expectation management.

      I was incredibly lucky, Richard, in that my first-time buddy had the same needs as mine. We evolved together – when we started working together about two years ago, we talked once a week. His and my deal is that you can call any time but the other person doesn’t have to take the call. That means that each of us is responsible for asking for help, rather than rescuing the other person, and for protecting our own time. If I call him and he’s not available (or vice versa) then it’s my job to find someone else to call, or deal with it on my own.

      I guess my suggestion would be to think about what you want, and what you can offer. Then think about how you can meet your needs without having to give something that isn’t going to work for you. If that’s talking at scheduled times and not taking calls in-between, that’s fine. There is no right or wrong way to be a buddy. It means you can be clear about your boundaries. You can also start by saying ‘I don’t know how this is going to work’ and experiment – it’s okay to change the deal if it’s not working, or look for someone else. It’s also not a bad plan to have more than one person lined up to call.

      Does this help at all?

  2. db Says:

    Isn’t this “just” classic time management. A series of tasks. An amount of time.

    A blank calendar is your best guess of what you will spend your time today, this week this month doing. You fill it in. On Tuesday, I think I’ll blow half a day on t’Internet. You are unhappy with the result. So you plan to do something else instead. In advance.

    The issues then become:-
    – did you think of the right tasks to do
    – did you estimate their times correctly
    – were you incontinent in your ability to execute the plan
    – did you trigger the tasks correctly

    The issue of triggering and incontinence are where most personal time-management fails. A single to-do list is critical to avoid multiple triggers, but unavoidable as email provides triggers as does your twitter-timeline, the phone, physical interruptions etc. Similarly boredom and lack of will can torpedo the simplest calendering.

    I see your use of a buddy helpful in triggering (once you speak with the buddy you are on the flow of the task and immune for outside triggers), in task sub-division and allocation (they help you break the task down correctly) and in execution — you feel reportable to your buddy: you have created an “artificial” reporting line.

    * * *

    I find that a single calendar which acts as my best guess at what I’m going to do, a single to-do list which acts as a reservoir for my calendar, and regular management session (an hour spent doing nothing but organising my tasks and time), together with isolating or explicitly managing other triggering mechanisms (email phone physical interruptions) is my best way of getting things done.

    When I do this well, I am spectacularly productive, and when I am frustrated with my lack of productivity, I often reflect on how I failed to follow these simple rules.

    The real trick, of course, is scheduling unproductive time too… Recognise your own need to play and ring-fence it.

    • Francesca Says:

      The issue of triggering and incontinence are where most personal time-management fails.

      I think that’s exactly right, although I wouldn’t put it like that, for reasons that I’ll come on to. But then you go on to talk about triggering, whereas for me (and, I think, everyone I’ve worked with on this) ‘incontinence’ is by far the greater barrier to getting things done.

      The reason I wouldn’t call it incontinence is because that’s what is called in positive psychology ‘a deficit model’. It suggests that there’s something wrong with not being able to get everything done that you’re setting out to do. I don’t agree with that, and even if I did agree with it I’d look for ways to reframe it because I don’t think it’s a useful way to help people get things done, any more than shaming fat people helps them lose weight. (Just to be clear: I’m absolutely not accusing you of any of this. It’s a cultural problem that comes up a lot, though, especially in large organisations.)

      I think it’s perfectly normal not to get stuff done. I adore Patrick, but I think he is very much the exception rather than the rule. Most people are not like him. For me, the most helpful way to work is to make this my starting point and then ask the question ‘how do we tinker with the system to help people get things done?’ Yes, nailing the triggering is good. But I think most people’s problem is not at the triggering level – we’re not that rational. For most people, it’s deeper – fear of failure is a big one, for example, or apathy. That’s not a machine-level problem and it’s not going to be treated by a machine-level solution. It’s a psychological problem and psychological support will be the most effective way of going about it.

      • db Says:

        Interesting.

        I use incontinence to denote a failure to follow through to do what we know is right. We have done some thinking and reflected on what is right, but then failed to do this. We might have got the thinking wrong: a two hour task won’t be done in a one hour slot, but this is a starkly different issue to having the task and the time and then lacking the discipline to do the one in the other.

        This is also different from not getting stuff done. This is wanting to get stuff done, planning how to get stuff done and then not getting stuff done. It is living in conflict with ones considered and chosen path.

        I refer to two of the issues: boredom and (more generally) lack of will. Habit is another strong reason for incontinence (and combined with habit triggers such as an email ping can be a disaster).

        I think maintaining a sensitive ear to what your mind is asking for — being entertained, distracted, exercised etc — is a critical part of the scheduling task. Creating time and space for play is part of what I recognise I need in order to be productive.

        In contrast to your analysis, I do think it’s a successful machine-level solution to a psychological problem. When people are faced with seemingly insurmountable tasks (such as getting out of bed with depression) then task and routine-oriented solutions can allow them to achieve what they want to achieve without becoming overwhelmed.

        • Francesca Says:

          Don’t disagree with any of this, and I think machine-level solutions are massively useful. But in my experience they’re rarely complete – some kind of support is also needed.

          Of course, this could be a semantic disagreement – working with a buddy could be filed under either psychological support or machine-level intervention, depending on how one constructs it. I would argue that it’s the former, because it’s not transactional – experiencing the support in the relationship is what makes the difference.

          • db Says:

            So perhaps a buddy’s role is to pick you up, make you a cup of tea and tell you JFDI? This works surprisingly often.

            • Francesca Says:

              Often but not invariable. Sometimes it’s to say ‘don’t do it right now’ or ‘do something else’ or ‘what’s really going on’.

            • Francesca Says:

              That’s why I don’t think it’s a machine-level solution. Because it’s not algorithmic.

              • db Says:

                Perhaps the algorithm is just complicated…

                Narrow here, isn’t it?

                • Francesca Says:

                  Yes. And I don’t think it matters. More important that we both construct it in a way that’s useful for us as individuals than that one or other of us is right. Some people would be more likely to accept help if they saw it as psychological support, and others if they saw it as a machine-level intervention.

  3. RichardS Says:

    Indeed, that’s very interesting. I shall ponder. Thanks again.

  4. Andrew Ducker Says:

    I think my largest problem is the “not doing things alone” bit – having other people to work with makes me massively more productive. I feel more of an urge to work on things when the work I’m producing is going to immediately affect someone else, and I love having someone else to throw ideas back and forth with.

    If the stuff I’m doing at the moment is successful I’m going to have to make sure that in my new position I have one (or more) people I can talk to about problems when I hit them.

    • Francesca Says:

      Doesn’t necessarily have to be someone you work with directly. And, absolutely, it doesn’t have to be just one person. I think it’s better to diversify, because different buddies suit different moods and situations, and it also means that you’re more likely to be able to get hold of someone when you need them.

  5. Alithea Says:

    Very timely post. My time management is pretty awful at the best of times and this really isn’t the best of times. Hopefully, this advice will help me, but even realizing I’m not the only one who gets crippled into inaction is helpful today.

  6. Michael Says:

    There could be something in here about maintenance, when you are actually in a contract. I tend to alternate between two states. If I’m in a contract, it will never end. When I don’t have a contract, I will never have another.
    Both of these conclusions are 100% wrong, (I’ve been freelancing for most of the last 20 years) but it doesn’t help me to prepare well for the end of any given engagement.

    • Francesca Says:

      For me that’s about keeping it in the day. Today I have a contract so I will show up and do it but I will also take care of myself and make sure that I’m keeping an eye on my A job and wider vision. Today I don’t have a contract so I will take some action to look for one but I will also take care of myself and make sure that I’m keeping an eye on my A job and wider vision. I will not think about what’s happening beyond today because I will trust that if I’m taking the right action then it will be okay.

      I don’t pull this off 100% of the time but it works well enough.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 203 other followers