|
Easily the best habit I’ve ever started was to use a productivity system. The idea is simple: organizing all the stuff you need to do (and how you’re going to do it) prevents a lot of internal struggle to get things done. 无疑，我曾经建立过的最好的习惯就是使用一个生产力系统。想法很简单：把所有你需要做的事情（以及你准备如何做）系统化，可以避免许多内心的纠结，从而完成事情。 There’s a ton of systems out there. Some are elaborate, like Getting Things Done. Others are dead-simple, such as simply using a prioritized daily to-do list. Some require software. Many you can do with just pen and paper. 存在无数生产力系统。有些复杂详尽，例如尽管去做（GTD）方法；另一些十分简单，例如只用一个经过优先级排序的每天待做事项列表。有些需要软件的辅助，也有许多只要纸笔就可以进行。 Being successful with a system long-term is hard. Here are just a few common problems: 成功地长期使用一个生产力系统是很难的，以下仅列出一些常见的问题：
These problems can be avoided, but it takes a little thinking about what the point of having a system is and what it can and cannot do for you. 这些问题是可以避免的，但需要思考一下，拥有一个生产力系统的意义是什么，它能为你做什么、不能做什么。  Why Use a System at All?究竟为什么要用生产力系统？Ultimately, everybody has a system for productivity. There are really only three different kinds: 归根结底，每个人都有一套生产力系统。其实只有三种不同的类型：
依靠别人的系统。你只是在对同事、客户、老板或家人给你的压力做出反应。明天是大限？我猜你要加班了。
感受和情绪的系统。今天感觉很有创造力？你或许可以完成很多工作。此前看起来很有趣的事，现在是不是显得很沉闷？我猜你没有在做它。在最好的情况下，这可能是有趣且自发的；但在最坏的情况下，看到你从未在任何令人感到有点挫败的事情上取得超过昙花一现的进展，那简直令人心碎。
你自己设计的系统。在这种情况下，你为自己制定规则，组织你的行动。情绪和外界压力仍然重要，但它们不再是指导你做什么、怎么做，以及多久做一次的因素。 Building the habit of a productivity system is about self-consciously creating a buffer between you and temporary emotions or external agents. You still need to respond to deadlines and listen to your emotions, but those aren’t the only things you heed when planning your day. 建立生产力系统的习惯，就是有意识地在你自己和暂时的情绪或外部力量之间建立一个缓冲区。你仍然需要回应最后期限、要倾听自己的情绪，但它们不再是你规划一天时唯一考虑的事情。  If your system is going to be liberating rather than suffocating, however, you need to follow a few guidelines: 然而，如果你的系统想要解放而不是扼制，就需要遵循一些准则： Rule #1 – Your system needs to fit your work (not the other way around).准则一：系统需要适配你的工作（而不是反过来） Any system is designed using certain assumptions about your work. If those assumptions are wrong, the system may backfire. 任何系统在设计时都会对你的工作做出一些假设，如果那些假设出错了，系统就可能适得其反。 Take Weekly/Daily Goals, the system I use most often. The idea is that you have two lists, a weekly to-do list and a daily to-do list. The latter is intended to be fixed—you decide what to work on that day and hold it constant, even if you finish early. 就拿我最常使用的每周/每天目标系统来说吧。它有两个清单，一个是每周待办事项清单，一个是每天待办事项清单。后者理应是确定的——你决定这一天要做什么并保持不变，即使你早早提前完成。 This system works well when you have a bunch of concrete tasks you need to finish that you might procrastinate on, but if you just sat down and did them all in a burst of focus you could probably get them done easily. The goal here is to use the potential reward of a workday finished early to get things done in an effective manner. 如果你有一堆具体的任务要完成，则这个系统很好用。你原本或许会拖延，但如果坐下来，集中精力把它们全部做完，可能很容易就完成了。这里的目标是利用工作日提前收工这个潜在的奖励来有效地做完事情。 This system doesn’t work as well if your tasks are ambiguous and open-ended. It struggles more when your day is mostly meetings occurring at fixed times on your calendar. If your daily goals list just contains one task, “Work on X.” then it isn’t even functioning as a productivity system at all. 但如果你的任务模糊不清，或者是开放式的，这个系统就没那么好用了。如果你这一天大部分是在日程表上固定的时间开会，这个系统也会比较吃力。如果你的该日目标清单上只有一个任务：做X，那么它根本无法起到生产力系统的作用。 Therefore, before you get started with a system, it’s important to ask what the assumptions are that underpin it. What does your work need to look like for this to be effective? 因此，在你开始运用一个系统前，重要的是询问它背后的假设是什么。这个系统要有效，你的工作需要是什么样的？ Rule #2 – The system should counterbalance your worst tendencies.准则二：系统应该抗衡你最坏的倾向 The guiding philosophy behind Getting Things Done is that, without writing down what needs doing, we’re liable to forget. Although the system aims at more than this, the key tendency it’s trying to counteract is simply forgetting what you need to do. 尽管去做（GTD）方法背后的指导理念是，如果不把需要做的事情写下来，我们就很可能忘记。尽管系统的目标不止于此，但它想要抗衡的关键倾向只是忘记你需要做什么。 Fixed-schedule productivity counterbalances the tendency to constantly work overtime, having your office hours bleed into your home life. You’re answering emails at midnight, but at the same time, you’re exhausted in the evening and not as sharp when at work. 固定时间表生产力系统想要抗衡的是不断加班的倾向，让你的办公时间渗入家庭生活。你在半夜回复邮件，但同时，你在晚上疲惫不堪，工作时也没有那么敏锐。 Maintaining deep work hours suggests the problem is mostly distraction, particularly from tasks that feel like work but aren’t your main source of value. 保持深度工作时间认为，问题主要在于分心，尤其是在做你认为是工作而不是主要价值来源的事情时。 The Most Important Task method works when you have a few hard tasks that you need to prioritze. It assumes you’ll end up working on convenient, easy tasks, rather than those that really matter. Quadrant systems that focus on important tasks over merely urgent ones, are another tool for prioritizing. 最重要任务法适用于当你有几项困难的任务需要优先处理时。它假设你最终会去做方便、容易的任务，而不是那些真正重要的事项。象限系统将焦点放在重要而非只是紧急的任务上，是另一种确定优先级的工具。 Breaking your day into Pomodoro chunks assumes the problem is that the work feels too large to get started, so you procrastinate. Small chunks with mandatory breaks focus your attention on the next mile marker and not the entire marathon. 把你的一天分成若干番茄时段，这种做法是假设工作看上去太大量，感觉无从下手，于是你就会拖延。但有强制休息的小块时间，让你把注意力集中在下一个里程标志上，而不是整个马拉松。 These tendencies need not be mutually exclusive. You could, for instance, combine deep work hours with Pomodoro chunks or the Most Important Task method. What matters is that these systems are balancing the problems you’re actually facing. A sales person investing in deep work hours probably doesn’t make sense. 这些倾向不一定是相互排斥的。例如，你可以将深度工作时间与番茄时段或最重要任务法结合起来。重要的是这些系统要适合你切实面对的问题。一个销售人员投入精力在深度工作时间上可能是没有意义的。 Rule #3 – The system needs a way of dealing with exceptions.准则三：系统需要一种处理例外的方式Every system, no matter how complicated, will create situations where it no longer makes sense to follow the guidelines it sets. 每一个系统，不论多么复杂，都会产生一些情况，在这些情况下，遵循它所设定的规则已经没有意义。 What’s needed, then, is a way of handling exceptions to the rules without making so many ad-hoc adjustments that the original system is rendered meaningless. Unfortunately, there’s no way to create a list of such meta-rules since if there were, they could simply be included into the original system. 那么，我们所需要的，就是一种处理规则例外的方法，而不需要做太多特别的调整，以至于原先的系统变得没有意义。遗憾的是，没有办法创建一个这样的元规则列表，因为如果存在这样的列表的话，就可以简单地将它们纳入原来的系统中。 For instance—let’s say you’re a writer. You have a bunch of tasks on your plate for the day, but all of a sudden you get a really good idea for an essay. You should probably start writing now or you’ll lose your train of thought. What should you do? 举例来说，假设你是一名作家，今天有一堆事情要做，但突然之间，你有了一个很好的想法，可以写一篇文章。或许你现在就应该动笔，否则就会失去思路。你应该怎么做？ There’s no “correct” answer to this situation. For some people, getting enough good ideas for writing may be the major problem in their work. For them, it makes sense to put on hold lower priority work to start writing as soon as inspiration calls. For others, they may waste days chasing ideas rather than doing the boring stuff that needs doing. 对于这种情况，不存在“正确”的答案。对于有些人来说，获得足够多的好点子来写，或许是他们工作中的主要问题。对他们而言，把低优先级的工作先放一放，灵感一来就立刻开始写作是有道理的。对其他人来说，追逐创意而不是做那些无聊但需要做的事情，可能会浪费好几天的时间。 In this sense, the “correct” answer is to develop self-awareness. Does this exception to the basic rules I’ve set for myself buffer against an unproductive tendency or support it? If this exception is made into a new rule, would it strengthen or defeat the system I’m trying to create? 在这个意义上说，“正确”的答案是发展自我意识。我为自己设定的基本规则的这个例外，是缓和了低效的倾向还是支持了它？如果把这个例外变成新的规则，它会加强还是摧毁我试图建立的系统？ This may sound finicky, but I’d argue that true success with systems involves making numerous such slight exceptions which become a part of the system themselves. To use a system means not only to follow its basic guidelines, but develop a skill of handling exceptions to the system that make it more useful, not less. 这听起来可能过分挑剔了，但我想说，真正成功的系统需要把无数这样的例外变成系统本身的一部分。运用一个生产力系统，不仅意味着要遵循它的基本准则，还要发展出一种处理系统例外情况的技能，从而使之更有用，而不是更没用。 Rule #4 – A good productivity system shouldn’t “feel” productive.准则四：好的生产力系统不应该“觉得”高效 Okay, this one requires some explanation. In short, the problem with aiming to “feel” productive rather than “being” productive is twofold: 好吧，这一条需要解释一下。简言之，以“觉得”高效而不是“做到”高效为目标，有两个方面的问题：
If you don’t feel more productive, how do you judge your productivity? The obvious answer is that you should get more work done with the system than without it. But even this can be misleading because in the short-term it’s always possible to just work really hard and burn yourself out. 如果你没有觉得更高效，那么如何判断你的生产力水平呢？显而易见的答案是，利用这个系统，你应该比没用这个系统时完成更多工作。但即使这样也可能是误导性的，因为在短期内，总是可以非常努力地工作，让自己筋疲力尽。 The better, long-term answer for evaluating your system ought to be that when you look back at the last quarter, year or decade with the system, you’ve been making a lot of meaningful accomplishments. If this is happening, then how the system feels on a weekly or daily level is totally irrelevant. 评价你的系统更好的、长期的答案应该是，当你回顾过去一个季度、一年或十年使用系统的情况时，你已经取得了很多有意义的成就。如果这种情况正在发生，那么每周或每天这个系统感觉如何，就完全不重要了。 Rule #5 – If your work changes, your system should too.准则五：如果你的工作改变了，你的系统也应该改变。 For some, work will be consistent enough to not need major changes. You simply stick to the same system and you’ll get the results you want. 对有些人来说，工作始终如一，不需要太大的改变。你只需要坚持同一个系统，就会得到想要的结果。 For me, I’ve found that as what I’m trying to do changes dramatically, I often need very different approaches to work on things: 对我而言，随着我想做的事情发生巨大改变，我经常需要非常不同的方法来做事：
在大学里，我经常依靠每周/每日目标。我的工作大多是一系列非常具体、可预测的任务。掌控学业就需要完成这些。
在MIT挑战期间，任务本身更庞大也更模糊，我的每天目标会是这样的：全天做课堂习题。在此设定固定的工作时间更合理，这样我就可以在需要的时候保持专注，但仍然给自己留有放松的时间。
在一年不说英语项目期间，就像MIT挑战一样，我有设定时间的核心任务，但也养成专门的习惯做一些小任务，例如在正常的工作节奏之外记识字卡或听播客，这帮助我抓住一天中的空闲时间。
在写书的时候，深度工作时间是非常重要的。我还有其他工作，所以我为那些事保留了待做事项清单。但留出整个早上进行研究和写作，意味着我可以完成很多工作。把这个放在第一位，也让我不至于以其他工作为借口来拖延，不做困难的研究/写作。
当我不得不推广新书时，我每天的日程表就像蜂窝乳酪一样，一天最多有五个播客。用日历驱动的办法来安排我的任务在此更有意义，否则很难决定什么时候是处理事情的最佳时间。 Some features of my system rarely change. I almost always have a calendar and daily to-do list, for instance. But adjusting to a new system when I have different types of projects has been more successful for me than stubbornly trying to fit everything into a single system. 我的系统中有些功能很少改变。例如，我几乎总会有一个日历和每日待办事项列表。但是当我有不同类型的项目要做时，调整到新的系统对我而言要比顽固地试图把所有事情都装进一个系统更成功。 Rule #6 – Always measure against your baseline (not somebody else’s).准则六：总是相对于你的基线（而不是其他人的）测量 If you’re ever evaluating a productivity system, the right measurement to make is “am I getting more done than I was a week/month/year ago?” If you’re, instead, asking yourself, “how close am I to being perfectly productive?” or worse, “how productive am I compared to so-and-so?” you’re going to have a bad time. 如果你曾经评估过一个生产力系统，正确的测量标准应该是“我有比一周/一月/一年前完成更多事吗？”但如果你问自己：“我距离完美的高效还有多远？”或更糟糕地，“与某某相比，我的生产力如何？”你会过得很糟糕。 The tyranny of ideal productivity is a major problem. I’ve worked with students in my courses whom set up a project successfully and were making consistent progress towards it. When I asked them how they’re doing, however, they complained that they still didn’t think they’re productive enough. 理想生产力的苛政是个大问题。我在课上曾与一些学生合作，他们成功地开始一个项目，而且不断朝着目标取得进展。可是当我问他们做得怎么样时，他们抱怨说，仍然觉得自己生产力不够。 But how much is enough? 但多少才够呢？ There’s certainly being insufficiently productive for your current goals or environment. If I were falling behind in my classes or failing to reach my deadlines, that might be cause for reflection. 显然存在对你当前的目标或环境来说不够高效的情况。如果我的课业落后或没能在最后期限前完成，那可能是值得反思的。 On the other hand, there’s a perverse tendency to judge yourself against some ideal benchmark. Comparing yourself against a theoretical possibility, rather than your own past results. If you get more done than you were getting done before, the system is successful. That you’re not able to work for sixteen hours without break cannot be viewed as a failure. 另一方面，也存在一种不合理的倾向，即根据一些理想的基准来评判自己。与某种理论上的可行性——而不是你自己过去的结果——相比较。如果你完成的工作比以前多，系统就是成功的。你无法十六个小时不停歇地工作不能被看成一种失败。 Rule #7 – A system cannot give your work meaning or motivation.准则七：系统无法给予你工作的意义或动机 A system can only shape and direct the motivations you already have, it cannot give you ones you don’t already possess. 系统只能塑造和引导你已经拥有的动机，而无法给你那些你还不具备的动力。 Work that feels miserable to you doesn’t magically become exciting with the right productivity system. At best, it becomes an endurable chore. 让你觉得痛苦的工作不会因为有了正确的生产力系统就神奇地变得令人兴奋。最多，它只能变成一种勉强能够忍受的苦差事。 Many failures of productivity are, at their root, deeper problems of meaning and mission in life. If you’re spending your days at a job you hate, if you’re studying a major you were coerced into rather than freely chose, if your dream job has become a nightmare, then no productivity system can fix this. 没有生产力，很多时候在根源上是生活的意义与目标的深层问题。如果你每天都在从事一份你讨厌的工作，如果你在学习一个被迫学习而不是自由选择的专业，如果你梦想的工作已经成为噩梦，那么没有生产力系统可以解决这个问题。 Productivity systems work better the more natural enthusiasm you have. They work like a lens, magnifying and directing the diffuse energy you already possess. The people, therefore, that tend to succeed with productivity systems already have a meaning and drive for their work. They have ambitions and recognize that getting things done efficiently is necessary for reaching them. 你拥有越多自然的热情，生产力系统的效果就越好。它们就像透镜一样工作，将你已经拥有的散射的能量放大和引导。因此，容易成功运用生产力系统的人，已经找到了他们工作的意义和动力。他们心怀雄心壮志，并且意识到高效完成工作是实现雄心的必要条件。 >>> 最新热门主题 <<< |
|
|
