DISQUS

Mrs. Micah · 2 years ago

I heartily agree. A distraction-free space is good if you're trying to meditate or something. But having distractions is what keeps me going. I don't want to be a robot. And I love it when random people come in and I have to interact with them, because it's something different to do!

Thermopyle · 2 years ago

I can't agree that Getting Things Done is good for the corporation and not good for the employee.

The WHOLE POINT of GTD is less stress for the individual using the system...which leads to greater productivity.

Less stress is always good.

I do agree about the workplace thoughts, though.

Flexo · 2 years ago

Thermopyle: Look deeper. If the whole point of GTD is less stress for the individual, what's the whole point of less stress for the individual? No matter what Human Resources says, the only reason a company cares about the health of its employees is because healthy employees come into work and do their job and cost the corporation less in health insurance.

I'm not talking about your boss, who on an individual level, cares about you as a person (I would hope). It is not this personal consideration that drives companies to send their employees to productivity workshops. It is consideration about the bottom line: healthy workers are more efficient workers, do their jobs in less time, and therefore use less of the company's capital resources.

Thermopyle · 2 years ago

Wait a second.

As I said, less stress leads to more productivity. Which is obviously what the corporation cares about.

But just because the corporations goal is more productivity, doesn't mean that the less stress isn't good for the individual.

Flexo · 2 years ago

Thermopyle: I do see your point. I probably shouldn't have said that all programs like GTD are not good for the individual. Clearly there are some benefits and several productivity programs seem to be a good way of aligning the indivudual's interest in good health with the company's interest in an efficient workplace, but (a) I don't think that's the case for all such programs and (b) there are better and less expensive ways than increasing productivity to achieve the same health-related improvements.

The message I'm trying to convey is that many of these productivity programs seek to eliminate indicators of individuality and "make Jack a dull boy" for the sake of the company's bottom line (which may be a faulty assumption, anyway). I wouldn't want to hire Jack, I'd want to hire a human being with a personality that comes through in everything they do, someone who is not afraid to be who they truly are (as long as their personality would be an asset, not an embarassment, to the company).

Thermopyle · 2 years ago

I agree with the sentiment completely. I just don't think GTD was a good example.

KMC · 2 years ago

Flexo, this is just a great post. Enough said.

r · 2 years ago

Hmmm. This is interesting. As far as my own life goes, I have to disagree: I work in a field with mediocre pay but which I *LOVE*. I do what I do because I think it matters. But when I have 3 tough projects I need to start, with an overwhelming number of little details that I just can't keep in my head all at once, and the other people in my office are talking and my head is filled with what I want to do after work and I don't really know where to start... I can literally spend an hour trying to get started, and realizing every 5 minutes that I've accidentally ended up back at my email, skimming through all the unanswered emails that I don't really ant to answer now anyways.

Eight hours later, I'm still at work, still frustrated, and preparing to stay late because I just didn't get enough done.

Systems like GTD really help me - and it's ME they're helping most, although the improvement in what I get done is a real benefit as well (and one I'm happy for, because, like I said, I believe that what I do is important).

Nonetheless, it's interesting to read your perspective here - I've never worked in the kind of corporate environment that a lot of the people on these PF blogs seem to, and it's a little bit foreign to me. It's interesting to think about to what extent there really is a mismatch in goals and priorities.

I think my biggest concern about your conclusion here is that it seems to assume that following organizational schemes like GTD make you "less human" somehow, and I really don't think I agree. If anything, they make you MORE human - ie, more in control of what you're doing in a conscious way. To the extent I can keep myself from slipping into a mindless hour of flipping through headlines, clicking through emails I don't really need to do anything about without really thinking about them, and just generally sitting there dreading my own work, the less mindless my life is, and the more of myself I can end up bringing to what I'm really there to be doing.....

Sasha · 2 years ago

I agree with your assessment of the "distraction-free workplace" tips provided--they seem to be more dehumanizing than anything.

However, for me, as a hyperproductive person with hordes of committments, both work and otherwise, productivity tips are always something I look at and evaluate individually. I'm always looking to improve the way I do my work because, when it comes down to it, there's a certain list of things I need to get done each day, and once they're done, I can go home and focus on the other things that interest me. Recently, I've stumbled across some great e-mail productivity enhancers which have helped me to spend less time poring over e-mail and more time doing the work I enjoy doing at my workplace, the same work which hopefully will lead to a higher salary for me at some point. I know so many people staying at work until all hours of the evening just because they're not prioritizing and organizing properly, and it makes me sad to see it because they're giving up on so much else.

I believe that ultimately, productivity enhancements should help lead us towards a "4-Hour Workweek" or Best Buy-type model, where our workday is entirely dictated by the tasks we complete at the time we choose to complete them, not the need to hold down a chair for 8 to 14 hours a day. As such, they can be quite useful, but employers need to become more advanced in the way they define traditional employment roles and hours.

Skellie · 2 years ago

Hi all,

As the author of the article in question, I want to say first and foremost that you have every right to disagree with my suggestions. For the sake of accuracy, though, I wanted to correct the way the essence of the article has been reproduced here.

1. Keep the light, lose the view. In this section, I suggest allowing yourself as much natural light as possible without giving yourself the ability to stare outside during work times. On breaks I would highly recommend going outside.

2. Move books into another room. When you're trying to get something done they'll only help procrastination.

3. Keep your desk focused. My suggestion was that if you didn't want to remove trinkets from your desk that you could move them to a place nearby but not in your direct field of view, so that you could still turn to them when you need to, but so they wouldn't be a distraction.

4. Minimize digital distractions. I think this one was fairly summarized.

5. Simplify decorations. If I was suggesting removing decorations, I would have titled the suggestion 'Removing decorations.' In fact, I suggested simplifying down to a few of your favorite decorations, and keeping them nearby but out of your immediate field of view when working.

I'd be happy for you to draw your conclusions about the article from that, even if those conclusions are the same, as it's a fairer representation of what was actually said.

A few questions I'll raise is: do material objects really make us more 'human'? Are we less human without them? Is it dehumanizing to go without a view -- and if so, what about those who have never had the luxury to live/work near one? Is our personality really only embodied in trinkets and decorations?

Flexo · 2 years ago

Thanks for stopping by and clarifying some of your points, Skellie. I appreciate that.

Material objects do not intrinsically make us more human, but when you work with other people, anything that helps represent your personality is a good thing. If they distract you a tiny bit, it's not the end of the world or the end of your job. At the end of the day, if you glanced out the window for a few seconds, you don't lose much productivity.

Speaking of the window -- if you have a view, use it. If you don't, then you don't. Nature is beautiful and it should be enjoyed at every moment. Artificially removing your view, closing yourself to the world, is not making the most of one blessing in particular that makes life worth living.

glblguy · 2 years ago

Flexo, found the article you mentioned. Very interesting perspective and I do think Skellie chimming in to clarify helped.

I think this is all about finding a balance. As one that is easily distracted, I am more productive in a simplified (but not white room) style office.

Depending on what I have to get done or if I have a deadline pending, I'll remove ALL distractions. Other times, say on Fridays, I spend a lot more time socializing and well frankly goofing off a little.

Guess what I am saying is both perspectives work depending on what you are doing.

Very interesting reads on both accounts.