I have a confession to make: I’m not a planner and I don’t have any real productivity system to speak of.
I’ve tried systems like David Allen’s Get Things Done
and after a month of I gave up on them. Sometimes I felt more
productive while using the systems, but when it came to assessing my
overall productivity at the end of the day, I could see little
difference.
So what did I do? I blamed myself. I thought of myself as “not good
enough” or lacking the attention span necessary to keep track of
everything. It seemed that the moment I wrote something down, or made
some note on my computer, I’d never look at it again. It was only much
later that I realized that what might be perceived as “not good
enough,” was really just “different.” Some people like lists and
priorities and systems, while others like to listen to their intuitions
and see where that takes them.
Time Management and Personality Types
The problem, as far as productivity is concerned, is that 90% of the
methods for becoming more productive are system-based. This is cool
for you if you’re a system-based thinker. If you are, you’ll probably
eat up GTD and other productivity systems like wholesome meals. If
you’re an intuitive, however, there’s a good chance you’ll feel
inadequate when reading these books. The systems in these books might
seem attractive for you at first, but because you’re not a system-based
thinker, you may have a high level of difficulty integrating them into
your daily routine.
Although the lion share of the books on productivity are for system
based thinkers, the actual number of system-based thinkers out there
don’t reflect this amount. According to Myers Briggs Personality Type
Indicator (MBTI) statistics, those who have personalities well suited for using systems like GTD are in the minority.
The MBTI is an index of 16 personality types. All of these types are
based on four different indicators: Whether someone is extroverted (E)
or introverted (I), sensing(S) or intuitive(N), thinking(T) or
feeling(F), and judging(J) or perceving(P). You get two choices for
each of the four indicators and once you have them all you’ve found
your personality type.
The best possible personality type for taking advantage of
productivity systems like GTD would be the ISTJ (Introverted, Sensing,
Thinking, Judging). Because ISTJs are introverted, they’re better at
knowing their personal priorities, and thus able to set more meaningful
goals for themselves. Because they’re Judging, they’re able to better
understand how to make action plans and break their goals into smaller,
more manageable steps. Because they’re sensing, they’re much more able
to follow along with lists than intuitive people might be. Finally,
because they’re thinkers, they’ll stick with their decisions more often
without letting emotions get in the way. The ISTJ is the Ultimate
Planning Personality, In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if most of the
people writing books about productivity systems were ISTJs themselves.
At the other end of the spectrum we have the ENFP. The ENFP will
probably have more difficulty with GTD than other personality types. As
extroverts, they’ll have more difficulty determining meaningful goals
for themselves. As intuitives, they’ll probably prefer to go with their
“gut feelings” and intuition over systems, rules and lists. As
Feelers, they’ll be more interested in consulting their emotions than
logical actions. And, finally, as Perceivers they’ll be more
comfortable doing things “on the fly” than planning things out.
Productivity, at least productivity as the GTD’ers define it,
doesn’t come easily to the ENFP. But in focusing on their weaknesses we
fail to acknowledge their strengths. The ENFP is great at living in
the moment and acting spontaneously. They may lack focus, but they make
up for it with raw enthusiasm and a passion for things exciting and
new. Their contributions cannot be so easily measured with the cold and
calculating metrics that many time management “experts” find
indispensable.
The problem with GTD and other similar systems is that they cater to
the Ultimate Planning Personality, and the irony is that people with
the Ultimate Planning Personality are probably such good natural
planners that they don’t need any help from these books. And yet, these
books have a virtual monopoly over what it means to be “productive.”
This shouldn’t be the case. According to a 22,000 person internet survey,
The Ultimate Planning Personality (ISTJ) only counts for 8.8% of the
(internet) population. There has got to be some alternative productivity
systems out there for the other 91.2%.
Alternative Productivity Systems
This imbalance wasn’t destined to hold for long, and I’ve already
noticed a few voices out there that advocate different philosophies
when it comes to productivity. One example of a such a philosophy is
outlined in Jonathan Mead’s article Why People Hate Productivity.In
it he argues that we should focus on fulfilment and creating value,
instead of just getting things done. He says that we shouldn’t rely so
much on metrics, but our own intuitive sense that we’ve been doing
fulfilling work.
As an intuitive myself, this idea resonated with me, and I’d like to
bet that Mead is probably also an intuitive. If you were a Sensing
person, however, you’d probably wouldn’t even know where to start with a
philosophy like Mead’s. Working without a list could be a very
dangerous thing to do. You’d be lost and directionless. So, while some
people probably thought Mead was making a lot of sense in his article, I
imagine there were others out there shaking their heads in derision.
Another example of an alternative productivity system is Leo Babauta’s “One Big Project”
method in which he argues that in order to achieve an ideal
productivity level you must limit yourself to only one big project at a
time so that you can focus all your attention upon it. I think this is
a good idea for intuitives because it keeps them from being distracted
by less important goals. System-based planners, however, might be more
comfortable working on several big projects at once, gauging
priorities and tasks and checking them off a list one by one. Again,
there’s no right or wrong here, just different.
Your Own Productivity System
In order to be more productive you must get to know yourself better,
so that your time-management habits complement your strengths rather
than painfully point out your weaknesses. Take personality tests and
strengths assessments, and build your productivity system on the
foundation of self-knowledge that you gain from making these
assessments. For starters I highly recommend Tom Rath’s Strengthsfinder 2.0 and Dick Richards, Is your Genius at Work?.
Although my own productivity system is far from complete, The more I
work on it the closer I get to something that works for me. I’m an
intuitive, and hate lists and systems, but I realize that I still need
order in my life. For me, I’ve found that narrowing my focus (as
recommended by Babauta) is a great way to go. I pour all my attention
into one huge project, and I only do work that relates to getting that
project done. It’s especially helpful if I clear my desk of everything
except for the project I’m working on right now. If I feel distracted,
and I can’t focus on the project, I do low intensity tasks until I feel
focused enough to go back to the high intensity task. If I don’t know
the next step I should take in my project, I gather information until
it’s clear just what the next step might be. This system was effective
enough for me to teach myself programming and create a web application in the space of seven months with no prior experience.
But just because the system I describe above works for me, doesn’t
mean it that it will for you. You can’t just buy a productivity system
off the rack and expect it to fit. You have to tailor it to your own
needs and your own strengths. Books like GTD are just a starting point.
There’s some great advice in these books, but not all of it will be
useful for you. Take what you can from them, but don’t feel as though
you’re bad at productivity because you can’t swallow them whole.
So what about you? Do you believe in the one-size-fits-all solution?
Or have you found something unique that works just for you?
0 Comments