The 4 Steps of Giving Direction – What a Great Leader Does

Dorothy and James are two members of a six-person team. The past few months they have been working on developing a new finance model to be used internally in their company. Both of them are great programmers and have performed very well in their years at the company. But recently Human Resources gave them both a very negative report. Excerpts of this report state: “This team does not know where it is heading” and “The work is not aligned with the goals of our company”. We know that James and Dorothy are great programmers with a good track record, so what has gone wrong? They are missing direction, the compass to guide their efforts.

The team Dorothy and James are in is a so-called self-managing work team (SMWT). That means they do not have a formal leader, but more of a coach. His objective is to let them do the work they do best and give them the challenges that keep both them, and the company, at the highest level of performance. A great leader does not focus (too much) on the day-to-day business. He should constantly be translating the vision and mission of the company back to tangible tasks that align with the former.

These efforts will be difficult on the one hand but pay off on both the short and long term. A leader (especially in a hierarchical organisation) may have trouble letting go of the daily operations. But by giving trust to your employees you empower them to take ownership of their own projects. The latter part is of course about which projects they should be working on. No matter the brilliance of Dorothy and James, if they are working on the wrong projects they (and the company) will perish in the long term.

Giving direction is a four-step process. The first is planning; know what goals you are going to give to your team. The second is do; give your team the freedom to execute the plans. The third step is study/check; see if everything is going in the direction you have intended it to go. And last but not least, act; now that you know the team is doing the right thing, let them flourish and improve both their own professional standing as that of the company.

Two weeks ago the leader of James’ and Dorothy’s team (and quite some other teams) was made aware that he needed to shift his focus. Rather than helping them with programming or interpersonal issues, he is now scouting for resources and communicating the vision of the company down to the lowest level. His teams have become more productive and have been given a new sense of purpose, all they needed was a little direction.

Choice Architecture

Every day we are faced with an insurmountable amount of choices. Will we buy brand A or brand B and will we diet or eat that candy? When making each of these choices we like to believe that we are free to choose what we want, but in how far are we that rational to make the best choice? A lot of attention nowadays is going out to choice fatigue, to a cognitive overload of the brain that then shuts down. In this article the focus will be a step more fundamental, are we even deciding our own choices?

A choice architect is someone that is responsible for organizing the context in which people make decisions. Without realizing you too are probably a choice architect. To demonstrate the power of organizing the context in which you make a decision the article will start with the subject of organ donations. From this example, the principles of defaults are explained. The rest of the text will explain principles of error reduction, mapping, and incentives.

Defaults

Defaults can be organized in two ways; opt-in or opt-out. In the opt-in, version you still have the check the box, the opt-out version allow you to check the box if you don’t want it. From a rational viewpoint, a person who would want to donate his organs will do so no matter the form. Research and real life examples however show a very significant effect of the defaults. People tend to take the most easy route, the way of least resistance. As for the organ donation forms, this resulted in an enormous difference between very alike countries The Netherlands (opt-in, 27,5%) and Belgium (opt-out, 98%). Important to note is that whilst The Netherlands spent a lot of money on promotion and campaigning, Belgium had an effective consent percentage of almost a hundred percent without spending any money.

Error Reduction

Next to shaping how we make decisions, choice architecture can also help us when making choices. A large percentage of women take birth control pills, these are taken every day for three weeks and then skipped for one week. To solve this problem and make the process automatic, the pills are sold in containers with 28 pills, of which 7 are placebo’s, just to make the process automatic. In the same spirit checklists for taking medicines can help prevent errors and save millions of dollars. And who has been using Gmail may have once or twice notices a reminder for adding the attachment, because you typed the words but did not add any document.

Mapping

By mapping all the choices you can make a better decision for yourself. But this is also where advertisement comes into play. When choosing between a vacation to Rome or Paris we are assuming people are similarly attracted to both options. But what if we expand the map with a third alternative that looks a lot like the Rome options (lets say with another hotel), people now are far more likely to choice the Rome option. This is know as the asymmetric dominance or decoy effect. Probably almost no one is going to go for the new option, but it highlights the other option that is very alike (Rome).

Incentives

Incentives too can change what we choose, and especially the salience of incentives. Sometimes you are very aware of the costs and use something wisely, like the taxi meter ticking away every few seconds. And in other times you are not so aware of the vast costs that you are making, like the bills you accumulate on a credit card each month. A system of showing the price of energy that is consumed by a household during peak hours may be a very effective way of adjusting families behavior. By changing the choice architecture an effect larger than adjusting prices can be achieved.

What it all boils down to is that we are not the rational beings economists would love to think of us. We are not so free in our (ir)rational choices (Predictably Irrational) and are influenced by many factors that come from the environment. These influences can help us for the better and let us solve the donor problem, safe for retirement and take our medicine. But at the same time also market us things we may not have needed, decoy us into buying a specific product and hide costs from us. We must be careful and aware of the choice architecture that is happening in our daily life, and use the principles for the good, not bad.

References & Further Reading:

1. Johnson, E., & Goldstein, D. (2003). Do defaults save lives?. Science, 302, 1338-1339.

2. Thaler, R., Sunstein, C., & Balz, J. (2010). Choice architecture. Available at SSRN 1583509.

3. Davidai, S., Gilovich, T., & Ross, L. D. (2012). The meaning of default options for potential organ donors. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,109(38), 15201-15205.

4. http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/02/27/i-can-t-think.html

5. http://www.thedailymuse.com/health/yes-no-maybe-so-defeating-decision-fatigue/

6. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/21/magazine/do-you-suffer-from-decision-fatigue.html?pagewanted=all

7. http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_ariely_asks_are_we_in_control_of_our_own_decisions.html

8. Predictably Irrational, Revised and Expanded Edition: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions – Dan Ariely – ISBN-10: 0061353248 | ISBN-13: 978-0061353246

9. The Upside of Irrationality: The Unexpected Benefits of Defying Logic at Work and at Home – Dan Ariely – ISBN-10: 0061995037

10. The (Honest) Truth About Dishonesty: How We Lie to Everyone—Especially Ourselves – Dan Ariely – ISBN-10: 0062183591 | ISBN-13: 978-0062183590

The Sleep We Need

We spend about a third of our life sleeping. It helps us restore our physical and mental capacity. We are ready for the next day after a full night of sleep but are dead tired when we only sleep a few hours. This article explores the why? how much? and other questions about sleep. Not only normal sleep cycles but also polyphasic sleep is explored.

What is Sleep

Sleep is the absence of consciousness, relative suspended sensory activity and inactivity of nearly all voluntary muscles. The body is at most time inactive and conserves about 10-15% energy during sleep. This number may strike people as low, and the reasons for sleep are still relatively unexplained. From the ecological perspective, it can be said that sleep could have had three ways or reasons of evolving; conserving energy, foraging (which predators do less, and sleep more), and predator avoidance (thus sleeping less). Some animals have found a way to even sleep with one side of the brain and not the other (unilateral sleep).

During sleep itself, the brain goes through four distinct phases. The first is Non-Rapid Eye Movement (NREM) stage 1 in which a person is falling asleep and the eyes open and close sometimes. In NREM stage 2 alpha waves from phase 1 are interrupted by sleep spindles and K-complexes (which help with tranquillity). Stage 3 NREM sleep is the slow-wave sleep, you are in a deep state of sleep and delta waves are the most active. During sleep, you mostly go through these phases first and from NREM 3 you go back to NREM 1 and finally REM sleep. Here most muscles are paralyzed, but at the same time, your brain activity looks alike to that of when you are awake. REM sleep deficiency is linked to a lack of learning complex tasks.

How Much Do We Need

How many hours a night do we need to fulfil the required amount of (REM) sleep each night? We experience about 90-120 minutes of REM sleep each night, with more REM sleep at the end of the night. A general consensus states that we need between 7 and 9 hours of sleep each night. This, however, differs between people, their physical activities and living habits. When you exercise more, the body takes a part of the sleep time to restore the muscles and rebuild them stronger than before. Most people take the required amounts of sleep in one go, but there are other ways too.

The most well-known of other sleep schedules is the siesta. People who take a nap every afternoon have a 37% reduction in coronary mortality. It also reduces the amount of sleep needed at night and reduces the total amount of sleep by 0,5-1 hour every day. Some more extreme forms of polyphasic sleep schedules are also around. One is called the Everyman and consists of 4,5 hours of sleep and two 20 minute power naps. Although a significant amount of waking time is gained, questions can be asked about gained productivity and loss of essential REM sleep. Sufficient research has yet to be done. This is also true for the Uberman schedule in which a person sleeps only 20 minutes every 4 hours.

I have some personal experience with Everyman (somewhere in 2010-ish). It enables for a lot of work (or gaming) to be done during the late night. The feeling of sleeping less also has an empowering aspect to it. The huge downfall, however, is social life, trying to nap between 4 and 6 PM every day is quite the task. But when challenged with a big workload, a daily opportunity for naps and the discipline of sleeping and waking on time, it is very possible to follow the Everyman schedule.

I can conclude that everyone needs an appropriate amount of sleep time. In still somewhat unexplained ways the body and the mind restore during the nighttime and allow you to function yet another day. Adopting another schema for sleeping can have some advantages of longer waking time. But be sure to spend them during something that requires attention, or you might fall asleep!

References & Further Reading:

1. http://www.scribd.com/doc/13916183/AQA-ALevel-Psychology-PYA4-Function-of-Sleep

2. http://www.journalsleep.org/CurrentIssue.aspx

3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyphasic_sleep#Uberman.27s_sleep_schedule

4. http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/4/15/103358/720

5. http://ohgodthechicken.com/2008/05/20/how-to-fall-asleep-quickly/

6. http://ohgodthechicken.com/2008/05/15/32/

7. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_eye_movement_sleep

8. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleep

9. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWULB9Aoopc

10. http://zenhabits.net/get-sleep/

Stress and Work Impairment

Stress is a daily struggle for a lot of people, it originates from work, keeping your finances in order, maintaining relationships and many more places. This article will focus on the first, while at the same time keeping in mind a spillover effect from and to other areas of life. The effect of stress on work efficiency is explored and in that light is stress really as bad as it sounds? Lets first start with defining stress.

Stress

Stress is generally seen as a deviation from the balance, both in mind and body. The balance, or so-called homeostasis, is disturbed by prolonged exposure to stressors (e.g. the boss at work), and which have a prolonged effect even after work is done. The body has an adaptive system that is very good at handling stressors that happen only once, longer exposure, however, will pose an allostatic load. If stress will lead to disease is dependant on many factors. One of these is the personal differences between people. Every person sees and interprets the same situation in a slightly different way, also the body of every person is different and thus reacts differently to stress.

Level of Stress

Some general conclusions about stress and work impairment can be made. When the pressure is very low a person performs sub-optimal, he is not challenged and feels bored. On the other hand when under very high pressure, he is engulfed by tension and is less focussed on the task at hand (all of the selective attention is consumed by stress). And in the middle there lies the perfect amount of stress. It should be enough to motivate a person, yet not too much that it disrupts the homeostatis for prolonged periods.

This framework is perfectly in line with the Yerkes-Dodson Law. This law states that the performance is at its best when the level of pressure is medium. The curve of performance follows an inverted U-shape. Not only for performance, but also learning under stress does this framework hold. Some pressure is stimulating, finishing a deadline in the night before a big presentation not so much.

In the workforce, stress can even lead to a burnout. And when someone has a higher score on a burnout measure (the Maslach Burnout Inventory) the performance is also impaired. Exhaustion as a part of burnout symptoms is related to negative work performance. This is mostly visible in lower client ratings, less organizational citizenship behaviour, and worse in-role performance. Research in this area supports the happy-productive worker hypothesis, when employees are more happy, they are too more productive.

It is clear that not all stress is bad for a person, when there is just the right amount of stress a person can be at its most productive. Negative consequences of too little stress may not be to big, but too much stress has far reaching consequences for both work performance and health. One should be wary of environments that are very stressful and take time to recover from this.

References & Further Reading:

1. McEwen (2006). Stress, Adaptation, and disease. Allostasis and Allostatic Load Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 840, 33-44.

2. http://www.mindtools.com/stress/UnderstandStress/StressPerformance.htm

3. Teigen, K. H. (1994). Yerkes-Dodson: A law for all seasons. Theory & Psychology, 4(4), 525-547.

4. Taris, T.W. (2006). Is there a relationship between burnout and objective performance? A critical review of 16 studies. Work & Stress, 20, 316-334.

Workaholic or Work Engaged?

Everyone loves the co-workers that like to make long hours, that are productive and are highly involved in the job. But there are subtle differences between the two categories of workers that fit the aforementioned description. Although it is too stringent to say the one is good or bad, work engagement can be considered to be better than a workaholic. Let us first explore both types, then compare them and eventually also look at burnouts, who is more likely to get one?

Workaholism

Workaholism consists of three dimensions, these are affect, cognition, and behaviour. The affective part consists of enjoyment in working, the excitement of doing your job. And on the other hand, the guilt and anxiety that workaholics experience when not working. From the cognitive point of view, they can be considered as addicted to work (like being addicted to chocolate or drugs). And the behaviour of workaholics consists of making long hours at work, to the cost of the work-life balance.

Work Engaged

Work engagement is a relatively new term coined by Dutch researchers. It is described as a positive, fulfilling, affective-motivational state of work-related well-being that is characterized by vigour, dedication, and absorption. As with workaholics the work engaged employee feels a strong identification with his work and enjoys working. The last characteristic is the high level of energy not only during but also derived from work.

Whilst the two types of workers may look alike on the surface, there is a vast difference in drive. The workaholic feels a compulsion to work, and has little possibility of stopping (and feels guilty when he does). The work engaged likes to work and is driven solely by this. The problem of the workaholic is that their need for work is so exaggerated that it endangers their health, family life, social functioning and overall happiness.

And a final danger is that of a burnout. Although there are some positive aspects of being a workaholic, it too does increase the chance of a burnout. Both forms of working carry the notion of working long hours, but without a sense of happiness, but one of guilt, exhaustion is far more likely. Next to a poorer performance in the long run, putting all your energy into work can physically and mentally exhaust a person. When compounded with the two other aspects of burnout, cynicism and inefficacy, a person who is a workaholic is far more likely to face a burnout than a work engaged employee.

References & Further Reading:

1. Ng, T. W., Sorensen, K. L., & Feldman, D. C. (2007). Dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of workaholism: A conceptual integration and extension. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28(1), 111-136.

2. Bakker, A. B., Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., & Taris, T. W. (2008). Work engagement: An emerging concept in occupational health psychology. Work & Stress, 22(3), 187-200.

3. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397-422.

4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burnout_(psychology)

5. http://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20130606150602-25745675-if-you-re-learning-you-ll-never-need-to-recharge?ref=email

The Art of Storytelling

The art of storytelling is a vital business skill that should be mastered by anyone trying to become a successful executive. This may be a bold statement to start an article with, it is too a very defend-able and profound skill that has not gotten the attention it deserves. This article will first explain to you what the art of storytelling encompasses and will then highlight why this skill is so important to possess, and how to develop it.

Storytelling has many functions, it is entertaining, educational, strengthens culture, and instils moral values. It has been around for a very long time. Even before man had the possibility of writing down their knowledge, we transferred our knowledge via stories. And great minds in the Greek Empire loved to share stories to convey their philosophy (e.g. Homer and Plato).

In a good story, the message is embedded in the story. It lets the listener in on your way of seeing things and learn him a lesson without being pushy or too overwhelming. Storytelling combines information and emotion. In light of the 3rd alternative thinking, it lets the other person in on your way of thinking, to see your side of the truth. And when the story is personal, which it is most of the time, they get a glimpse of what motivates you. A main function of storytelling, therefore, is awareness, to get your message out there.

So why is this such a strong and vital skill to have? It is one that can differentiate you from the rest, to make you pop out. In the competitive workforce of today, most of the knowledge workers in your area of expertise have the same level of IQ, the same technical skills as you. You can differentiate by throwing in some EQ/EI or Emotional Intelligence. Not by working long hours, but by having many great stories to tell you can both enlighten people and make yourself a unique contributor to a company.

A place where this technique is actively encouraged is in the hotels and resorts of Steve Wynn. Here every morning before a shift starts, one of the employees shares a story. It allows a personal touch to be given to every employee and results in a great work spirit and self-esteem boost.

One other great aspect of storytelling is the transfer-ability. Technical skills of your job are mostly not applicable in daily life (although negotiation techniques may be applicable to managing toddlers). Storytelling is great for kids, family and friends alike, everyone loves a great storyteller.

To develop it you do not need extensive skills or a large training budget (although training can help), all you need is practice. Stories do not have to be a perfect replica of the ones that were told to you, it is about the message the story needs to convey that you need to be able to transfer. It is all about being authentic and putting your cards on the table. Storytelling gives you the ability to transform people, companies and your own life, so do not waste any time and start now!

References & Further Reading:

1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4cH2T3Nw6E

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storytelling

3. http://www.storytellingacademy.nl/ (Dutch)

4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTQ1V1JBtFA

5. http://peterguber.com/telltowin/index.php?ref=pg_com

6. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/2393432

7. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTQ1V1JBtFA

8. http://books.google.ca/books?hl=nl&lr=&id=YPN5rK1bs3kC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=storytelling+develop&ots=WznEfFFb01&sig=ZEmrXb4Hc4B1Lly00nLGBFyoE2U

Why We Do What We Do

What makes us get up every morning? Or what drives us to go to work, be with our loved ones, excel in a sport… What motivates us? That is the question that this article tries to answer. Not answer in full, you would probably need a full decade of studying and a book to explain it. This article tries to enlighten you on the basic principles of motivation, and how you can use it to your advantage.

Also see my review of Drive.

Intrinsic Motivation

Motivation is what energizes people and directs their energy, it can be divided into two different kinds. The first, and most powerful is intrinsic motivation (or effectance motivation). This is the innate motivation for dealing with your environment. It follows from competent interactions with the environment and is not dependent on any drive-based reinforcements. This means no external factors are needed to fuel this motivation, it is based on organismic needs to be competent and self-determining.

Extrinsic Motivation

Extrinsic motivation is directed towards the environment, towards attaining a certain goal, or outcome. A common example of this rewards, the pay you receive for the work you do. Other forms of extrinsic motivation are competition and punishment. But both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation can be complementary, you can work because you feel competent and you get paid well.

The Best

So what works best, intrinsic or extrinsic motivation. The vast majority of people would say the latter, but it is the first. It is not the pay you get that motivates you, it is the opportunities you get that drive you. When intrinsic motivation is activated you get better results, more creativity and less tension. But when you activate extrinsic motivation, creativity dies, results diminish and tension increases.

Experiment

A great example of this is the Candle Problem by Duncker in 1945. He asked participants to attach a lit candle to the wall. The participants had; a candle, matches, pins which were presented in a box. Although people tried a wide range of solutions, only by pinning the box to the wall and putting the candle in the box, they could solve the problem. There were two conditions, the first group was told their time would be used to set the bar, they were not presented with any extra rewards. The second group was told that their time could win them money, up to 10 dollars for the best time. Then something counter-intuitive happened, the second group took 3,5 minutes longer on average to solve the problem than the first group. They had an extrinsic motivation that superseded their intrinsic motivation, it killed their creativity and diminished the performance.

From this, we can conclude that extrinsic motivation is a killer for tasks that require a cognitive load, that makes you think (even a little bit). So what if you presented the materials next to the box. In 1963 Glucksberg did exactly this, and the incentivized group outperformed the intrinsic group. So for simple tasks, that do not require any real thinking, external motivation does work. But sadly that is not how it is applied in the life of today, people are incentivized by big bonuses, cars from the company, but also in school by paying kids for grades. It kills creativity, promotes short-term thinking (narrowed focus) and diminishes performance.

To Conclude

So we must stop giving monetary and other external motivators to improve performance. To make someone work, learn and excel it is best to give someone the freedom to express his intrinsic motivation, to let free the creativity. One great example of this is the 20% time, invented at 3M in 1948 and applied at Google, HP, and other great companies. It states that workers get 20% of their time to work on projects they like, on things they are intrinsically motivated to do. What kind of results can it bring? Major innovations have sprung up in the 20% time, things like HTML and Gmail are only a small example of this.

References & Further Reading:

1. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Springer.

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivation

3. http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html

4. Weisberg, R., & Suls, J. M. (1973). An information-processing model of Duncker’s candle problem. Cognitive psychology, 4(2), 255-276.

5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candle_problem

6. http://lifehacker.com/5932586/make-work-feel-less-like-work-with-the-8020-rule

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator for Leaders

This was the very first article I first shared in the winter of 2013. Although I still agree with the explanation, I do question the value and validity (over time) of these tests and if they even add anything beyond listening to your colleagues and understanding how to communicate effectively.

What do personality and leadership have to do with one another? It turns out, a whole lot! It is not only education, heritage and luck that determine who will become a leader, but personality too. In the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) several personality styles have come on top. This article will explain the basics of the MBTI, the ‘leadership’ personalities and its implications for leadership.

The MBTI was developed in 1962 by Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers. Their studies were based on the psychological types by Carl Jung. From this, they extrapolated 16 different personality styles, defined by eight characteristics on four dichotomy scales. The questionnaire to measure with the MBTI consists of 26 questions. Some variations use more questions and others say you can define each characteristic by one question.

Although the validity and precision decrease, by asking four questions you can get a good and fast feel for your type.

• Attention and Energy: Where do you prefer to focus your attention? Where do you get energy? [E/I]
• Information Intake: How do you prefer to take in information? [S/N]
• Decision Making: How do you make decisions? [T/F]
• Interaction with External Environment: How do you deal with the outer world? [J/P]

In the MBTI there are no good or bad types. Every one of them has its riches or benefits and pitfalls or blind spots. In the general public, the most common types are: ISTJ (11-14%), ISFJ (9-14%), ESFJ (9-13%), and ESTJ (8-12%). So how do these compare to those in leaders of businesses?

They show both a strong overlap with the general public, as well as certain trends that are linked to the leaders only. The styles are: ISTJ (18.2%), ESTJ (16.0%), ENTJ (13.1%), INTJ (10.5%). As is evident in both categories Judging is the most pervasive category. In the leader group there are however also only Thinking, and no Feeling types in the top four.

It is theorized that skills like decision making and logical thinking are preferred over considering feelings and making less rational decisions. Within business leaders, you can also see that intuition is valued (but not as much as the more rational sensing). This could be due to the positive effects of making fast decisions or the ability to make decisions based on less information.

But what are the implications of these types, are there really no good or bad types? As you can see there is a strong preference for the Thinking type. The problem with this is that about 65% of the male population and only 35% of the female population have this type. So by default women have a statistical setback in the leadership game.

This disadvantage, however, does not have to be too great. In every great team, it is best to have a diverse account of personalities. For when everyone is an extrovert you may end up with a house full of hens, and when everyone is the sensing type, who will consider the (irrational) feelings of your clients?

To conclude it is clear that some styles are more pervasive in leaders and that these are built on the rational thinkers who take the lead. They have with them the skills to lead a team and to manage a company. And at the same time build on the skills and influences of all the other types with which they are surrounded.

References & Further Reading:

1. Briggs, K. C. (1976). Myers-Briggs type indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

2. Barr, L., and N. Barr, Leadership Development: Personality and Power. Eakin Press, 1994.

3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator

4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESTJ

5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISTJ

6. http://www.personalitypathways.com/type_inventory.html

7. http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-leadership/myers-briggs-does-it-pay-to-know-your-type/2012/12/14/eaed51ae-3fcc-11e2-bca3-aadc9b7e29c5_story_3.html

8. http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/does-it-pay-to-know-your-type/2012/12/13/a12c9e90-4589-11e2-9648-a2c323a991d6_graphic.html

Adopted from: http://www.workingresources.com/professionaleffectivenessarticles/article.nhtml?uid=10003

Eisenhower Matrix – Important things First

“What is important is seldom urgent and what is urgent is seldom important.” – President Dwight Eisenhower

The Eisenhower Matrix is one of the best, simplest and clearest time-management tools that you should always use; below is the associated framework

Why

After a long day at work, most people cannot readily name what they have achieved. When asked the question what the long-term impact is of what you have been working on for 8-12 hours, most have no idea. This is where the Eisenhower Matrix comes into play. It is the perfect tool for separating the (1) tasks that you need to do, (2) things to plan, (3) what to delegate, and (4) what to eliminate. Using the Eisenhower Matrix will make you more productive by becoming more effective.

1) Do

The first category is for things you need to do, these are important and urgent. Work for an upcoming deadline on a management report or last-minute preparations on a presentation are examples in this category. This is work that you are most qualified to do. This is where you add value, but mostly in the short-term.

2) Plan

To reduce pressure on the first category, you need to plan your important tasks. This can be research (on that presentation that is due in two weeks) or designing a system to report finances (for that management report). Things you do here are things that have a long-term impact. At the same time, it is difficult to actively engage in these kinds of activities (because of the lack of urgency). Two motivators may help you to spend more time here, a) urgency equals pressure, here is where you can avoid that, b) you can design time-saving devices that make the ‘Do’ category more manageable.

3) Delegate

Tasks that do not add value to your work but do need to be completed, should be delegated. These are tasks that someone else can do more easily and/or will not add to your work outcomes. Emails and tasks that are relevant to other people may fall into this category. Of course, it is good to help your colleagues, but only do this when you are the right person for that task. If you are not the perfect person for a task, delegate it.

4) Eliminate

If it is not important and not urgent, then eliminate the task. Browsing ‘news’ websites, watching TV and exchanging gossip at the water cooler are all examples of this category. Less obvious examples can be the reorganization of your folders, or aligning pictures in your powerpoint that will not be used externally. Busy work and other time-consuming activities should be eliminated.

Examples

1. Peter reserves the first two hours of his workday to work on planned (2) tasks, during this time he is not to be disturbed
2. Sarah used to book all her flights herself, but now leaves it to her secretary (3)
3. James is very well prepared for his presentation (2) and is just adding the latest developments from last week to the slide deck (1)

When to Use

Always. Ok, maybe daily, but certainly weekly. The Eisenhower Matrix will lessen the clutter you have in your life and get you to focus on the tasks that really matter. At first it may take some getting used to, but believe me that you will do this automatically very quickly. Be sure to use it in your work or studies, and maybe even try it out for the rest of your life.

“Simplicity boils down to two steps: Identify the essential. Eliminate the rest.”  – Leo Babauta

 

More on the Eisenhower Matrix:

http://www.eisenhower.me/ – Eisenhower Matrix app for iOS

http://lifehacker.com/dwight-eisenhowers-best-productivity-tricks-1579214953 – LifeHacker post on Eisenhower

http://www.positive-change-tools-for-success.com/Time-Management-Matrix.html – Covey Time Management Grid

Stoic Fatalism

As you might know, I follow the (ancient) philosophy of Stoicism. Read my full Stoicism article here. Today I want to delve into one specific aspect of stoicism, fatalism.

Before I start, here’s a short (personal) definition of Stoicism: the pursuit of tranquillity, to be happy with what you have without experiencing negative emotions. In other words, Stoicism (for me, and in general for the philosophy) is not to banish emotion from life, but to banish negative emotion.

Past Fatalism

The ancient Stoics believed that fate determines what happens to us. That in life, we have a role and that we must play that role to our best ability. Therefore a man, according to Marcus Aurelius “should welcome every experience the looms of fate may weave for him.”

But we shouldn’t be fatalistic of the future, rather we should be only fatalistic about the past and present.

Take for instance a mother with a sick child. She should do everything in her power to nurture her child back to health. But if the child may die, or live on disabled, she shouldn’t get stuck in ‘what if’ scenarios. She should let go of the past.

Present Fatalism

We can decide where we want to be in a minute, hour or day, not right now. We can’t change where we are at this very moment. Therefore we should accept this moment (and the past) and be satisfied with what it brings. We can either spend this moment wishing it could be different, or we can embrace this moment.

If we think fatalistically about the past and present, we also refuse to think about how it could be better. By doing this a Stoic will make the present situation also more enjoyable. There are no alternative pasts, and you can be very happy/tranquil with what life has brought you so far.