Should you manage time, attention or results?

I am in one of those periods when I am beyond busy. It happens to me from time to time: I have lots of commitments to lots of people (including me) and I really, really need to produce a lot in a limited amount of time. Some of what I need to produce is not especially fun.

What do you do? I recently received coaching emails from a well-known expert that talked about getting rid of wasted time and managing time in 30 minute increments. It's easy to agree in theory, but I don't think I do.  Agree, I mean. I also don't manage time this way.

Who are you when you know yourself? What's important to you? Some of the things that are important to me are a belief that the arts make us smarter and an equally powerful belief that God (substitute the universe if you are more comfortable with that) doesn't punish us for being present with people who need help or support or just to have company. So I fit music and art into my schedule even when they don't fit. And I sit with people who don't need me (but maybe they do need something) even when I have lots to do.  I also work to honour my commitments (even the one that says that once a week I pick up my 2 year old niece early from day care.)  I do not know how cause and effect works all the time, but I know these things to be right and important in my life.

Everything else is up for negotiation. Sometimes I let myself get really tired. A little sleep deprivation actually helps me stick to boring tasks that have to be completed on a deadline. Sometimes I cycle through social media in the hope of a breath of fresh air (it's not often there). What I don't do is make statements like "schedule only 60% of your time" or "stop wasting time."

Just be the best person for you as often as you have a choice to make.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The hypnotic contract

Under what conditions would you allow someone else to tell you what to think?   If you have watched a stage hypnotist, you have seen what looks like one person exercising remarkable control over the thoughts and actions of another. It is fascinating, in part, because we have all seen it happen in real life. Suddenly someone we know seems to be relying on someone else to do the thinking.  Even if the influence is good, it is a little frightening. The secret is that there are no magic words.  In order to lead someone into hypnosis, that person has to be willing to go there. Often the people you see on stage are more than willing. For whatever reasons, they are enthusiastic about giving up self control and allowing someone else to take charge. They know that there are limits to what can happen on stage and they are only agreeing to give up control within those limits. What you see in hypnosis is an agreement between two people. Like all agreements between human beings, it stretches as far...
Read more

Good with people

What do you think of when you hear the phrase "good with people?" When a wine is good with steak, it means that both the steak and the wine taste better when enjoyed together. If you are 'good with people' that could mean that both you and they perform better when you work together. "Good with people" should not be confused with charm or grace. Many famous leaders have, in the absence of any obvious charm or eloquence, managed to get people to produce at high levels. Some introverts fail to be influential; some extraverts fail to be effective. The most useful criteria for "good with people" is the performance that results when an individual is working with others: does the sum exceed the total of the parts? Or would they all have been better working from separate cubicles? We are entering the season of networking: it's a perfect time to observe the difference between the people who are working the room and the people who are making the room w...
Read more

The fine line between observations, suggestions and commands

I have been watching Tony Robbins this week in the documentary called " I Am Not Your Guru ." You can read a nicely ambivalent review in the Financial Times here.   I think the ambivalence is built into the process, which might be surprising given the loud celebration that characterizes the Date with Destiny in the film. For those of us whose work has evolved from NLP, there are lessons to be learned from modelling the most famous and successful practitioner of NLP (Robbins has far surpassed all the founders by all measures of success). Because he does so much so well, Robbins lets us see how fine the line is between observing and suggesting. Let me explain. Robbins frames his "interventions" both with the exercises and performances we do not see in the film and with his invitations. The film opens with an intervention with a young man who says he is suicidal; it is only later that we see Robbins say he is looking for someone who is suicidal to work with. Since...
Read more