Broadly speaking, tasks fall into one of two categories:
The Rhythmic Philosophy for Tackling Undecidable Tasks.
- Tasks that can be reliably broken into action steps.
- Tasks that cannot be reliably broken into action steps.
Cal Newport calls this second category of tasks undecidable tasks.
One of the key ways to turn dissatisfaction into actionable change is by documenting and executing clear step-by-step next actions (with the use of checklists and protocols). But what do you do with dissatisfaction that calls for change with demands that cannot be reduced to step-by-step actions?
The answer is to design protocols that set the conditions under which such demands can be engaged.
Luckily, there are real-world examples of this at play.
It's the blogger who arrives at a workdesk (or couch) and gives attention to completing a blog piece for 90 minutes. Enablers, such as purging thoughts on a page, and facilitators, such as getting dressed for work, are triggered and/or set so that completing a blogpost can happen.
But it is not always as simple as give attention to your task for 90 minutes because depending on your situation and/or your task 90 minutes may as well be 60 years. (Einstien did not simply arrive at the General Theory of Relativity by sitting with a timer.)
The given is this: Time, effort and attention are required for tackling undecidable tasks. When protocols have sufficiently been used to solve for and deliver decidable tasks the realization arrives that the problem with what's left to tackle isn't lack of time, effort or attention but an absence of strategies suited to undecidable tasks.
The solution resides in philosophies and strategies for deploying condition-setting protocols whose sole purpose is to enhance the conditions under which undecidable tasks can be tackled.
There are many such strategies. But one philosophy (outlined by Cal Newport in Deep Work) is especially relevant here.
The Rhythmic Philosophy for Tackling Undecidable Tasks.
This philosophy works particularly well for you with loads of obligated, decidable tasks. It does not ask you to “solve” or "do" the undecidable task. It only asks that you establish a reliable rhythm of showing up to "solve" or "do" it.
Imagine you have a full-time job as an operations manager. Your work demands that the operations of a plant keep running optimally. How the plant is run is largely clear: there are procedures, protocols, and established ways of doing things. Most of the problems you encounter day-to-day are decidable.
But you also know that the company would benefit, tremendously, from a better framework for running the plant. Designing that framework is an undecidable task. There is no clear sequence of steps that leads from where you are to where you can be.
The Rhythmic Philosophy prescribes you create a rhythm of showing up to do work. So you decide that everyday from 07:30am to 09:00am you will block time to make progress on designing an effective framework for running your plant. Following through on this decision creates a work rhythm. And following a work rhythm can be the difference between progress and stagnation.
Undecidable tasks can be hard and avoiding them can be easy (because you are engage with other tasks).
But the key take away is this: some tasks, especially the most valuable ones, cannot be reduced to repeatable step-by-step actions that can be returned to with predictability and ease. For these tasks, what you need, to deliver progress, are not protocols for completion, but protocols that enact philosophies and strategies that make engagement with the tasks inevitable. Deploy rhythms, or other applicable philosophies and strategies suited to your situation, to ensure avoidance of this type of task is minimized.
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for reading this piece on BasicPulse...
Do you have questions, suggestions or comments?
Please leave them in the comment section below.
Be remarkable!