This idea seems more like how to stick to doing something you don't like, rather than how to stick to a goal. The seem similar but the latter implies you have a choice in how to accomplish it.
If you assume that a goal is a long term accomplishment and the strategies you use are short term, then something like this will allow you to stick to a strategy. However, done to excess would imply doing things you hate all the time, against the peril of doing things you hate more, which will make your life miserable.
This line of thinking reminds me of most school systems, which uses somewhat the same strategy, ie. do this simple task, now, or in the immediate future, to some exact specification, and if you don't do it properly you'll get a bad grade.
I find it much more helpful to tread lightly when considering doing things you don't like in order to accomplish a goal. If you can find a way where you are enjoying yourself and working towards a goal at the same time, it is much better even if it seems likely to cause you to take longer at doing it.
For instance, I often switch projects during the day, rather than work on only a single project, getting bored with it, but pushing on and hoping that I'll get through it quick and be able to go onto the next one. By switching it up, not only am I happier and actually excited to work on the stuff I do, but there is a synergistic effect, since the concepts of one of the projects often applies to the others as well.
Agree on this being a good strategy. It also does a good job of covering the case where you learn that you aren't actually that interested in X, or are only interested enough to get a particular task done.
This would probably work best if you enjoy every part of your work. However, I assume most of us have to do things that we don't particularly enjoy. Or, even more dangerously, we have lower-priority more-enjoyable things to do. Then a little bit of self-discipling and planning is necessary.
Sometimes not working towards a goal for a day gets me closer than working badly towards goal. And sometimes, waiting until the moment is right is better than trying to seize the moment.
It's a very fine line though and can become a good excuse not to get things done or let circumstance drive us around. But I for one do not believe in working on a goal every day. Just most days.
If we assume doers as being goal-oriented, then I can see it being easier to educate them in ways to help them get closer to their goals faster and more efficiently. On the other hand, someone who doesn't really care about the goal, isn't going to care as much about getting there sooner or in a better fashion.
That said, I've found myself in both camps on various projects. When you're working on something where the end result is really exciting, it makes a huge difference on you and your team. It's exhilarating. On the flip side, projects were you don't care about the end result, are really brutal to work through. You just work for the paycheck. Any sort of educating about how to do things better feels particularly pointless.
Sounds like a fair summary, but you haven't addressed what (I believe) is the key issue: OP feels bad.
pain [...] consistently high [...] don’t have the energy or enthusiasm
I think a huge turn off for "goal-setting" is that corporations do it, and also that they do it for the purpose of productivity. However, I'm not suggesting it for productivity, but for satisfaction. The satisfaction of completely something. Of climbing the mountain, completing the quest, bringing the elixir back, solving the problem, creating something new. I'm not saying one "should" do it, I'm saying it's a way to feel satisfaction, instead of pain.
The key idea here is that a goal not something to strive for, but a limit. Not to force you on, but to let know when you have accomplished something - when to stop! Now, if you're a perfectionist, you may say, "but there's so much more! I've barely scratched the surface. I've done nothing! I'm not worthy!"
However, if you had a goal, and you can remember how it looked when you set it (that it did seem challenging), then when you reach it, you can compare where you were, and where you are now. And you are forced to acknowledge the fact that you have accomplished something.
This gives a flood of satisfaction, like it or not.
Now, turning to "sprint" vs. "system". Firstly, I stressed that the goal must be doable. There's minimal risk that you can't complete it, if it is "doable". And if it's too hard, pick a smaller one.
Note also that you can shift topics between goals, just as you can with a system. I'm talking about small goals, not huge overreaching ambitious goals. Baby steps - but steps nonetheless!
Sprints seem very compatible with human psychology: movies, books and music usually consist of alternating tension and release. There's a series of difficult obstacles, not just one, but a series of problems and solutions. People really respond to this.
Curiously, it seems that literal sprints (i.e. running) are also much better for building fitness than consistent paces. And they even have "sprints" in some agile methodologies (not sure if that counts for or against my argument...).
Finally, there's absolutely a magic in programming, that you code something... and something happens! It's a child-like thrill that (in my opinion) it is absolutely crucial to respect and preserve, especially as ones goals become ambitious and abstract. Fred Brooks talks about the "sheer joy of making things" - and compares us both to a child making mud-pies and to God creating nature. (just found an excerpt online: http://cs.calvin.edu/books/processing/references/brooks/myth...)
I would guess that, evolutionarily, the human body and mind is adapted to sprints - and this is what makes goals feel so satisfying to us, just as we enjoy food, water etc. The "system" approach makes logical sense, and what you say about it seems true. It's just that you haven't addressed how it engages with human motivation (but assume it is "an automatic and permanent drive") - which is the issue OP is struggling with.
Lastly - I think OP's personal solution will actually come from the thoughts he has when he feels that pain. Part mistaken, part profound - only OP will know which is which. I don't claim my suggestion is right for OP, just adding another perspective.
Another take on what the author proposing is to simply not care about the output of the task, but focus on how that person approaches the problem (even if they don't manage to complete the task at all).
No doubt, that's how most people do it. But ideally you don't want your life to be one of hating most of what you're doing and then just compensating for it in a way that keeps the feedback loop working.
I can appreciate how effective these methods are, but I personally don't like the idea of stripping one of the enjoyable things in my schedule down to how efficient it is. Working hard is great, but I think there is such thing as too much of it at the cost of an enjoyable life (for me).
It sounds nice. Think of something worthwhile. Do it. Repeat. Awesome.
There’s two main issues I see
1) there’s no connectedness. You could spend your life swirling in different directions instead of focused in one. Ironic given this technique is supposed to help you focus.
2) there’s no consideration for timing. I might think of 5 worthwhile things now, but what if I choose the one that can be done anytime because it’s fun, vs the one that needs to be done by tomorrow? It seems quite easy for some important deadlines (that I’ve committed to) to slip!
Thank you for this one. I think it ties in nicely with the idea of "goal factoring" (also from LW) where you ask yourself "why am I doing what I do? Is there a more direct way of achieving this?" This can be helpful when working with habits and maintaining harmony between your goals and emotions.
I tend to alternate between two extremes. One extreme is "get shit done anyway you know how ASAP!" The other is "learn, explore, take your time, and do things right." I let my own ambitions determine which zone I'm in, and they last from a couple weeks to months. What I learn while I'm in the "take it slow" zone always helps me be more productive in the "do it now" zone. And the do it now zone helps keep me motivated to learn more stuff, and the cycle repeats :)
I understand this is not in line with the hn planability mindset, but there is some truth to that stody. I am also follow this idea - you need ambitious projects which have a low predictability of success. But if you try often/hard enough occasionally one actually works out. To me this makes life a lot more exciting than working/achieving small predictable goals. Life is too short to play it save.
I think this advice is correct, but if I follow it I'm going to have a hard time ever getting the most important thing done. Why would I want to work on that, when I can work on the most interested thing instead? :-)
I guess at some point one needs some discipline... but that's not very fun.
That's timeboxing? He defines timeboxing has having an alternative plan if you fail to meet your goal. ("..think of goal setting but with 2 additional branches after having reached or failed at reaching the goal.") That doesn't sound like timeboxing to me.
Timeboxing is, you do what you can within a fixed time limit. So you're more inclined to rigorously prioritize, stay close to a shippable state and reduce scope if you're running out of time.
I think this is a good illustration of the value of process-based goals over outcome-based goals. The things under control, you completed. Those not under your control you did not. Sounds pretty cool to me.
> So I feel like I always need to be doing something and then when I do something I feel like I should be doing something else that is "better"
I know that feeling from when I studied. What helps is to clearly set yourself time slots for work (studies, projects,...) and play (meeting friends, doing sports, gaming,...). I've been most productive on days where I either had deadlines to meet or some fun activities in the evenings to look forward to. Avoid „analysis paralysis” and the „dark playground” [1].
> I would also consider myself a perfectionist, so that makes me feel like everything I am doing has to be perfect [...] I like to take well thought out steps in anything I do [...] but sometimes I feel like that holds me back from actually doing the thing I am thinking about and lead to no progress again.
Try to get over that mindset. Embrace the pareto principle (80:20 rule) instead. Done is better than perfect. Have a bias for action, for just doing things and embracing failure instead of overthinking. Applies to both personal and professional life.
> I find side projects to be fun, but motivation to continue working on them dies off within a week or two
If you really want to have a side project that will keep you engaged over a longer time, don't do „portfolio projects” or TODO examaple apps. Instead, try maintaining an existing project that actually has some users. Getting feedback from real users is really motivating, even if the project just has a few dozen stars. It's also a better preparation for your first job, because you'll most like get onboarded on an existing codebase instead of working on a greenfield project.
Build up a regular workout routine. Make it a habit so that at some point you don't have to force yourself to do it but you're the kind of person who simply does it. As a bonus, workouts in the morning provide a lot of mental clarity for the whole day.
If doing CS/studies stuff is easy for you but socializing is difficult, work on being social and enjoying to make friends and talk to people. To me, having a partner and some good friends provides a lot happiness and burnout prevention.
Don't obsess about your studies. You'll need the degree as entry ticket, a good final grade is useful. But nobody in the industry cares about which courses you took.
In this context: forcing a choice in activities between one option or other when both are meaningful to a person. That's not to say you should never abandon activities, only that folks tend to over-do it.
If you assume that a goal is a long term accomplishment and the strategies you use are short term, then something like this will allow you to stick to a strategy. However, done to excess would imply doing things you hate all the time, against the peril of doing things you hate more, which will make your life miserable.
This line of thinking reminds me of most school systems, which uses somewhat the same strategy, ie. do this simple task, now, or in the immediate future, to some exact specification, and if you don't do it properly you'll get a bad grade.
I find it much more helpful to tread lightly when considering doing things you don't like in order to accomplish a goal. If you can find a way where you are enjoying yourself and working towards a goal at the same time, it is much better even if it seems likely to cause you to take longer at doing it.
For instance, I often switch projects during the day, rather than work on only a single project, getting bored with it, but pushing on and hoping that I'll get through it quick and be able to go onto the next one. By switching it up, not only am I happier and actually excited to work on the stuff I do, but there is a synergistic effect, since the concepts of one of the projects often applies to the others as well.
reply