Hard copy & my take on the issue, in PDF format ('edm.pdf') below.
Thanks for sharing and reminding us of this principle (and good summary in your PDF, by the way). I've used it for years. Many people on this forum have lives crammed to the brim with tasks and expectations. Hopefully, if they learn about and apply the principle, they will find some relief (at least from self-imposed stress).
Sounds cryptic I know but... To start simply begin. No seriously, just jump in & learn as you go - not learn first, but as you go. Contributing to your IRA/401K for instance, is more important than a new car unless your car cant get you to work so you can make that IRA contribution no? We cant be hamstrung by indecision.
@Perikles said:
What I never understood about this system is how I would go about determining wether a given task is "important" or "not important."
Does anybody have an idea on how I could do that?
Any tips welcome!
To make this distinction you need to define goals and put each task in relationship to those goal.
Example: Training the handstand is related to my goal of living a generally fit person. But being good at handstands is not such a big component of general fitness nor is handstand training high on the list of efficient training modules. Basic endurance training on the other hand gives me more access to sub-goals like metabolic health (huge component of keeping mental sharpness as one ages, more btw. than mind training), physical health and performance (to be able to keep up with my daughter).
Sometimes, it is useful to translate importance into relevance. Then some of categorisation is easier.
So, when a task does not support any of my goals, it is to be deemed "unimportant" which means it is either to be dropped or delegated.
If a task does not support any goal, it should not be done. Duh! Who needs to wade through a matrix to come to that conclusion?
So, I can see, Eisenhower's definition for "important" was: "Should I (the president) DO that task myself?" - this was a clear cut thing. But I don't see how this translates to useful tool for personal task management.
What does "delegate" mean?
In @Mike_Sanders take on this it says "Assign to staff else resolve yourself." Let's say I don't have any staff I could delegate to, then it becomes "resolve yourself" which would be the same as in quadrant 1 since the task is urgent.
It comes down to: do urgent things immediately and plan to do non-urgent steps towards your goals.
Doesn't make sense to use that matrix, or does it?
Contributing to your IRA/401K for instance, is more important than a new car unless your car cant get you to work so you can make that IRA contribution no?
To me, the Eisenhower Matrix is not an epistemic tool to discover wether a goal is important or not. Rather it is a basic schema of regularly re-structuring your schedule.
So, if you make an inventory of tasks you do daily and weekly and discover that you are doing mostly urgent stuff you'd change some things.
But is not that the Matrix tells you what is urgent and what is not.
So then you do not really use the Eisenhauer-Matrix to determine if you shoul do a task now or schedule it later. Well, I guess you are not using it at all. You are just mindful of Covey's general notion that important things often are not urgent; or so.
Yeah, sure, but do you have staff? Do you really use the Eisenhower-Matrix? Probably not.
Instead you are doing something that works for you, that you invented yourself, inspired by some more or less foggy notion of that Eisenhower thing.
It is probably worthwhile to exermine what it is that you really are doing and go from there.
What other ideas do you employ or even just like?
For individual task management, I find Mark Forster's DIT and some of his other systems pretty good.
For deciding wether I'll do a task the moment it shows up – the question the Eisenhauer Matrix supposedly solves - I try to always rather NOT do it now but schedule it for later.
I do things immediately only if I absolutely have to or if it would be much more work if I postpone it. Other than those two reasons I always schedule for later. It's the default position.
@Perikles said:
So then you do not really use the Eisenhauer-Matrix to determine if you shoul do a task now or schedule it later. Well, I guess you are not using it at all. You are just mindful of Covey's general notion that important things often are not urgent; or so.
Something like that. But I wouldn't underestimate the usefulness for regular reflection.
Covey, the guy who popularized the Eisenhower-Matrix for use in personal task management etc, did advocate another tool for this very use: the weekly compass.
Anyway, it comes down to proper goal-setting and sorting your priorities in life ie. set the right goals.
@Sascha if you need to review your schedule regularly to balance things out, it is probably a good idea to exermine your process against how these things ended on your schedule in the first place.
Yes. I've staff that reports to me, just as I too am staff that reports to those above.
Re: Do you really use the Eisenhower-Matrix? Probably not.
Reckon?
Re: Instead you are doing something that works for you, that you invented yourself, inspired by some more or less foggy notion of that Eisenhower thing.
Chuckle, right. You know I didn't invent that & even if I did - so what? That's the modus operandi of Sapience eg - writers write, artists (some of them) paint, coders code, yadda-yadda-yadda... To be creative is nothing to be ashamed of. For you perhaps. For me? Nah... its non issue.
Re: It is probably worthwhile to exermine what it is that you really are doing and go from there.
Err Examine? Its all good, in fact great here, no kidding. See, here's the bottom line for me: If you don't care for the system (which for reasons I cant fathom you apparently assume I use to choose breakfast every day) simply don't use it. Its no more complex than that. Don't loose any sleep over it.
Comments
Thanks for sharing and reminding us of this principle (and good summary in your PDF, by the way). I've used it for years. Many people on this forum have lives crammed to the brim with tasks and expectations. Hopefully, if they learn about and apply the principle, they will find some relief (at least from self-imposed stress).
Thank you for kind reply Geo. And sure enough the system works for me as well. Maybe not all folks, but for me its all good.
Tinybase: plain text database for BSD, Linux, Windows (& hopefully Mac soon)
What I never understood about this system is how I would go about determining wether a given task is "important" or "not important."
Does anybody have an idea on how I could do that?
Any tips welcome!
Sounds cryptic I know but... To start simply begin. No seriously, just jump in & learn as you go - not learn first, but as you go. Contributing to your IRA/401K for instance, is more important than a new car unless your car cant get you to work so you can make that IRA contribution no? We cant be hamstrung by indecision.
Tinybase: plain text database for BSD, Linux, Windows (& hopefully Mac soon)
To make this distinction you need to define goals and put each task in relationship to those goal.
Example: Training the handstand is related to my goal of living a generally fit person. But being good at handstands is not such a big component of general fitness nor is handstand training high on the list of efficient training modules. Basic endurance training on the other hand gives me more access to sub-goals like metabolic health (huge component of keeping mental sharpness as one ages, more btw. than mind training), physical health and performance (to be able to keep up with my daughter).
Sometimes, it is useful to translate importance into relevance. Then some of categorisation is easier.
I am a Zettler
The logic of this still escapes me.
So, when a task does not support any of my goals, it is to be deemed "unimportant" which means it is either to be dropped or delegated.
If a task does not support any goal, it should not be done. Duh! Who needs to wade through a matrix to come to that conclusion?
So, I can see, Eisenhower's definition for "important" was: "Should I (the president) DO that task myself?" - this was a clear cut thing. But I don't see how this translates to useful tool for personal task management.
What does "delegate" mean?
In @Mike_Sanders take on this it says "Assign to staff else resolve yourself." Let's say I don't have any staff I could delegate to, then it becomes "resolve yourself" which would be the same as in quadrant 1 since the task is urgent.
It comes down to: do urgent things immediately and plan to do non-urgent steps towards your goals.
Doesn't make sense to use that matrix, or does it?
Yes, but how does the matrix help with that?
To me, the Eisenhower Matrix is not an epistemic tool to discover wether a goal is important or not. Rather it is a basic schema of regularly re-structuring your schedule.
So, if you make an inventory of tasks you do daily and weekly and discover that you are doing mostly urgent stuff you'd change some things.
But is not that the Matrix tells you what is urgent and what is not.
I am a Zettler
Howdy Perikles. I'm not sure its a method that suits you. No biggie, lots of differing ways to conquer the world yeah?
What other ideas do you employ or even just like?
Tinybase: plain text database for BSD, Linux, Windows (& hopefully Mac soon)
@Sascha:
So then you do not really use the Eisenhauer-Matrix to determine if you shoul do a task now or schedule it later. Well, I guess you are not using it at all. You are just mindful of Covey's general notion that important things often are not urgent; or so.
@Mike_Sanders:
Yeah, sure, but do you have staff? Do you really use the Eisenhower-Matrix? Probably not.
Instead you are doing something that works for you, that you invented yourself, inspired by some more or less foggy notion of that Eisenhower thing.
It is probably worthwhile to exermine what it is that you really are doing and go from there.
For individual task management, I find Mark Forster's DIT and some of his other systems pretty good.
For deciding wether I'll do a task the moment it shows up – the question the Eisenhauer Matrix supposedly solves - I try to always rather NOT do it now but schedule it for later.
I do things immediately only if I absolutely have to or if it would be much more work if I postpone it. Other than those two reasons I always schedule for later. It's the default position.
Something like that. But I wouldn't underestimate the usefulness for regular reflection.
I am a Zettler
I still don't see it's use for that at all.
Covey, the guy who popularized the Eisenhower-Matrix for use in personal task management etc, did advocate another tool for this very use: the weekly compass.
Anyway, it comes down to proper goal-setting and sorting your priorities in life ie. set the right goals.
@Sascha if you need to review your schedule regularly to balance things out, it is probably a good idea to exermine your process against how these things ended on your schedule in the first place.
@Perikles
Re: Yeah, sure, but do you have staff?
Yes. I've staff that reports to me, just as I too am staff that reports to those above.
Re: Do you really use the Eisenhower-Matrix? Probably not.
Reckon?
Re: Instead you are doing something that works for you, that you invented yourself, inspired by some more or less foggy notion of that Eisenhower thing.
Chuckle, right. You know I didn't invent that & even if I did - so what? That's the modus operandi of Sapience eg - writers write, artists (some of them) paint, coders code, yadda-yadda-yadda... To be creative is nothing to be ashamed of. For you perhaps. For me? Nah... its non issue.
Re: It is probably worthwhile to exermine what it is that you really are doing and go from there.
Err Examine? Its all good, in fact great here, no kidding. See, here's the bottom line for me: If you don't care for the system (which for reasons I cant fathom you apparently assume I use to choose breakfast every day) simply don't use it. Its no more complex than that. Don't loose any sleep over it.
Tinybase: plain text database for BSD, Linux, Windows (& hopefully Mac soon)