- Spent 20-30 hours researching what we know about productivity. About an hour a day for two weeks, plus a few more days where I dedicated more than an hour to studying productivity.
- Skimmed through the entire archives of Cal Newport's blog (the author of Deep Work, which I had read about a year or two ago), and read the posts that seem most useful.
- Searched through lesswrong.com and lesserwrong.com and read relevant and useful posts, including How to Beat Procrastination.
- Searched Google and Google Scholar for academic research on productivity (I couldn't really find anything).
- Read a few Harvard Business Review articles on productivity, starting with For Real Productivity, Less is Truly More.
- Read a few summaries of Getting Things Done, by David Allen. Watched his Ted Talk.
- Read through about 5-7 pages of the highest voted questions on the Personal Productivity Stack Exchange and went down some link rabbit holes.
- Spent about two hours thinking about how to categorize productivity advice.
- I have a degree in neuroscience, know a decent amount about cognitive sciences more generally, and have read various related books such as Peak by Anders Ericsson, which reviews what we know about expert performance.
- Spent about 20 hours writing and editing this post.
I've come across a lot of productivity-related advice over the years. Tips, tricks, blog posts, books, etc. I feel like I know a decent amount about productivity, and that I should be pretty damn productive. Unfortunately, the knowledge I've accumulated doesn't seem to have translated into actual success. Actual productivity.
So then, a few weeks ago I decided that enough is enough. That I need to take a step back and really spend some time "getting better at productivity". In order to "get better at productivity", I figured that I should start off doing some research. Why try to figure things out myself when I could just start off standing on the shoulders of others? This post outlines and summarizes what I have found in my research.
I initially wasn't planning on writing this post. I don't study productivity professionally. I'm not the most qualified person to be doing this. I've only spent 20-30 hours researching this, so there must be a lot of things I'm missing. Still, I think that there are some strong reasons for writing this post:
- I couldn't find a similar post that already exists. Maybe that's just because I'm a bad googler. Maybe it's because they're actually hard to find. Maybe it's because they don't exist in the first place. I'm not sure which of these are true, but I suspect that the last two are true to a notable degree. If not, I apologize for adding to the pile of shitty articles on the internet.
- My writing style may make things "click" for certain readers. Scott Alexander just wrote a cool article about this idea: Non-Expert Explanation.
- Hopefully commenters will add new information. I am attempting to summarize what is known (and thought) about productivity, but since I'm not an expert in this field, I expect that my attempt at summarizing will be incomplete and imperfect. I intend for this post to be a starting point. I hope that readers will share their knowledge, and perhaps we as a community can create a pretty awesome outline and summary of what humanity knows about productivity. (I'm not sure what the best way is for us as a community can coordinate these efforts. I'm happy to continuously update this post based on information provided by commenters. I'd be happy to see someone use this post as a starting point, do more research into productivity, and then write their own similar post. I guess we can talk about this point in the comments.)
Other preliminary notes
- This post heavily borrows from various sources. Cal Newport's blog, Deep Work, Peak, Rest, Getting Things Done, and How to Beat Procrastination are probably the core ones As Raemon notes, part of what makes these resources useful is that they "provide lots of context and anecdotes and inspiring speeches that cause you to take the ideas seriously". And so reading them may be helpful even if you already understand the big ideas they discuss.
- As Raemon also notes, regarding beating procrastination and actually following through, this post mainly recommends "outwitting" your basic instincts. However, there is an alternative approach where you try to "correct" those basic instincts, which seems to require more upfront effort, but more effective in the long run. I nor he is aware of too much evidence supporting this approach. My personal impression is pretty skeptical of the "correcting" approach, but I don't know much about it and am interested in hearing from those who do.
High level outline
- Uncrowd your mind
- Develop your "focus muscles"
- Prevent procrastination
- "Pregame" before deep work
- Think hard
- Think easy
- Follow through
Lower level outline
Note: I attempted to categorize things, but I don't think the categorizations are perfect. However, I think it is useful to have categories, even if they aren't perfect. I am interested in hearing how others would categorize things.
Uncrowd your mind:
- Capture your tasks
- Get small tasks out of the way
- Break tasks into small actions
- Deal with psychological issues
Develop your "focus muscles":
- Embrace boredom
- Deliberately train
- Remove temptations
- Use schedules/planning
- Use social pressure and precommitment
- Record yourself
- Expect work to be effective
- Actually care about the task you're doing
"Pregame" before deep work:
- Use routines/rituals
- Utilize location
- Think hard
- Utilize active recall
- Utilize spaced repetition
- Use a coach
- Focus on the wildly important
- Take time to decompress
- Get enough sleep
- Take naps
- Take breaks when appropriate
- Experience solitude
- Perform "productive meditation"
- Use a productivity cheat sheet
- Reward yourself
- Punish yourself
Uncrowd your mind
Capture your tasks
I have to freeze my Transunion credit report. Fortunately, I have this written down on my todo list. If I didn't, there would be a compartment in my head whispering to me:
Remember to freeze your credit report... remember to freeze your credit report... remember to freeze your credit report. Wait, which credit report do you need to freeze? Equifax? Transunion? Yes, Transunion. Remember to freeze your Transunion credit report... Remember to freeze your Transunion credit report...
More generally, when I don't write things down, I find that a different compartment starts whispering to me:
Adam, I have this feeling that there are things you need to do, but I can't recall what exactly they are. This isn't good. If we don't figure out what they are, they won't get done.
When you write out your todo list, both of these compartments get flushed out of your brain. There's no need to worry about remembering to freeze your Transunion credit report. It's right there on your todo list. And there's no need to worry that there is something you're forgetting. You'll have the confidence that if there was anything you needed to do, it would be on your todo list.
Epistemic status: I am not aware of any academic research on it, but it makes sense, has worked for me, seems to work for a lot of people, is the focal point of the most popular productivity system (Getting Things Done), and is a part of many other productivity systems. So I'd consider task capture to be "very plausible".
Get small tasks out of the way
Yes, task capture can help you clear your mind, but it isn't perfect. Even if you have everything written down, many people still have lingering feelings of "remember to freeze your Transunion credit report" and "I feel like there are things I need to do, but I can't remember what they are". So then, if you can get small tasks out of the way, it's probably a good idea.
Getting Things Done recommends that if a task takes two minutes or less to complete, you should just do it right away. This especially makes sense to me when the alternative is spending 90 seconds writing it down and figuring out which todo list it belongs to. Of course, two minutes is a pretty arbitrary amount of time. If you really hate "having things on your plate", perhaps five or ten minutes would work better for you.
Sometimes it may make sense to take an "administritive day" where you just get all of your small tasks done at once. That way, small tasks won't interrupt your flow on other days where you're trying to work deeply on a hard task.
Epistemic status: I am not aware of any academic research on it, but it makes sense, has worked for me, seems to work for a lot of people, and seems to be recommended a lot. So I'd consider it to be "very plausible".
Break tasks into small actions
Which todo list are you more likely to procrastinate on?
- ☐ 15 page sociology paper
- ☐ 15 page sociology paper
- ☐ Research
- ☐ Outline
- ☐ First draft
- ☐ Second draft
- ☐ Feedback
- ☐ Final version
If you are a human like me, it's the first one.
- "15 page sociology paper" isn't an action you can take. It's not really clear what exactly the first step is. It feels extremely overwhelming.
- When you think of it as "many small tasks", every time you complete a task it feels rewarding and encouraging, and you end up starting a success spiral. When you finish the first draft, it really does feel like you've accomplished something. On the other hand, when you think of it as "one big task", you don't feel that same sense of reward and accomplishment as you are making progress on it.
Epistemic status: There seems to be acaemdic research supporting this. Luke Muehlhauser mentioned this point in his awesome article How to Beat Procrastination and cited A mega-trial investigation of goal setting, interest enhancement, and energy on procrastination. In addition to the academic research, it makes sense to me and the anecdotal evidence I'm aware of also seems to strongly point toward it being true. With all of that said, I'd go with "pretty strong" on this one.
Consider the following schedule:
- 9:00-9:30: Shower, brush teeth, get dressed
- 9:30-10:00: Breakfast
- 10:00-12:00: Class
- 12:00-12:30: Lunch
- 12:30-3:00: Study
- 3:00-5:00: Class
- 5:00-6:00: Work out, shower
- 6:00-10:00: Dinner date
It seems pretty standard and reasonable at first glance. But that's because you suck and you're committing the planning fallacy again.
- Breakfast might only take thirty minutes, but only if everything goes perfectly. If everything doesn't go perfectly, you'll end up feeling stressed and rushed to get to class on time.
- Your work out and shower might take exactly an hour, but what if the showers are all occupied? Are you going to show up to your date smelly?
The point is that this schedule might work out perfectly, but it usually won't. Which means you'll usually be stressed from being behind schedule.
Why not underschedule and give yourself more leeway? Yes, it might mean that you won't squeeze as much in to the day as possible, but it also means that you get to enjoy peace of mind. This peace of mind will help you to focus hard and work deeply.
Epistemic status: I have a pretty strong intuitive sense that this all is true. There isn't one specific post (that I recall), but Cal Newport's blog talks about this topic.
Deal with psychological issues
I don't see this point mentioned much in the world of productivity. Maybe this is because it's presumed to be obvious.
Or maybe it's because "abnormal" people are considered beyond the scope of productivity systems, and instead part of the scope of medicine. But I don't really think this makes sense.
- Tons of people suffer from psychological issues, so they aren't really "abnormal".
- Most issues fall along a spectrum, and so even if you aren't technically "depressed", any sort of depressive feelings you may have will harm your productivity.
Anyway, I'd just like to emphasize that if you suffer from any psychological issues, those issues are probably hurting your productivity.
Epistemic status: Strong.
Develop your "focus muscles"
Imagine that you are waiting on line for a coffee. There are two people in front of you. If you're like most people, you'll probably take out your phone to occupy you while you're waiting.
Imagine that you are driving and you pull up to a red light that seems to have about 30 seconds on it before it turns green. If you're like most people, you'll probably take out your phone to occupy you while you're waiting.
Imagine that you are at the movies and are waiting for the cashier to be ready so that you can pay for your popcorn. If you're like most people, you'll probably take out your phone to occupy you while you're waiting.
Imagine that you are taking a shi... ok, I'll stop.
The point is that we are always seeking stimulation and that we have lost our tolerance for a little boredom. This trains our minds to be very "jumpy", and this "jumpiness" can really harm our ability to think deeply.
Exceptional things — be it ideas, writing, mathematics, or art — require hard work. This, in turn, requires boring stretches during which you ignore a mind pleading with you to seek novel stimuli — “Maybe there’s an e-mail waiting that holds some exciting news! Go check!”
Epistemic status: Cal Newport dedicates an entire chapter to this idea in his book Deep Work. He cites the research of Clifford Nass, which found that "constant attention switching online has a lasting negative effect on your brian". Both of these things make me feel pretty confident that the idea is true, along with the fact that it is aligned with what common sense and anecdotal evidence point to.
We have "focus muscles", and by training, you can strengthen them. One way of training is by attempting to memorize a deck of cards. Another way is by playing chess. Another way is by meditating. All of these things will improve your ability to control your attention, and this will improve your productivity.
This one also comes from Cal Newport's book Deep Work. In it he gives an example of a student who has ADHD, spent time memorizing decks of cards, learned to control his attention, and improved so much academically that he got accepted into a prestigious Ph.D program.
Epistemic status: There does seem to be good evidence that you can train your "attentional control" ability by doing things like memorizing a deck of cards. And it does seem pretty clear that better "attentional control" helps with productivity. So then, I feel pretty confident that it is a good idea.
Removing temptations is a lot easier than resisting them. Here are some concrete tips:
- Blocking internet use:
- SelfControl is great for those with Macs. The authors of SelfControl recommend SelfRestraint and Cold Turkey for Windows users. There is a version of SelfControl for Linux users, but it is out of date and should only be used if you know what you're doing.
- Update 11/11/17 thanks to Raemon: Freedom is a paid alternative to SelfControl. The notable benefits over SelfControl are: 1) can block apps, not just websites, 2) schedules, 3) synced across devices.
- Instead of using an app, you could block websites by using etc/hosts. The downside to this is that you can also unblock them, whereas with an app like SelfControl, you can't unblock them until the timer expires.
- You can try removing the network card on your computer, if possible. Or unplugging your router. (Paul Graham tried disconnecting his main computer from the internet, and had a side computer across the room he'd use when he needed to use the internet. This strategy didn't actually work for him though.)
- Blocking distracting things on the internet:
- AdBlock is usually just used to block ads, but it can also be used to block other things as well. For example, I used it to hide the sidebar on StackExchange so I'm not tempted to click interesting links.
- Not Now Youtube is a Chrome extension that blocks recommended videos from showing up on YouTube.
- Hide YouTube Comments is a Chrome extension that hides YouTube comments.
- On Chrome, by default, the new tab page will tempt you with links to previously visited sites. Follow these instructions to make that page blank.
- Prevent autocomplete in the URL bar. This is how you do so on Chrome.
- Do your work somewhere that doesn't have any distractions. For example, go to the library instead of studying in your dorm's lounge.
- Don't bring your cell phone with you when you go out to do work. If you really need to have it with you, at least put it in your bag or something rather than keeping it in your pocket.
- I've always thought it'd be an interesting idea to have a safe with a timer on it. You would, for example, put your cell phone in it, set the timer for 4 hours, work for 4 hours without having to deal with the temptation of your phone, and then the safe would unlock after 4 hours have passed.
Epistemic status: Very high. This is common sense, right?
There is a perhaps subtle, but important difference between schedules and plans. At least as I'm operationally defining the terms here. A schedule is like an appointment where you will jump through hoops to make sure that you are "on time". It is rigid.
Planning is different. It isn't rigid. You may plan to eat breakfast from 9:00-9:30 and then work from 9:30-12:00, but if you get a phone call and breakfast takes longer than 30 minutes, you can adjust your plan on the fly.
I agree with Cal Newport's perspective that planning is usually a better approach. For most people, when you try to follow a rigid schedule, you end up failing, and then giving up on the schedule entirely. Then you feel bad about yourself and proceed to "wing it".
With planning, if your breakfast takes 60 minutes instead of 30, you can just adjust your schedule accordingly for the rest of the day. No feeling bad about yourself. No winging it.
Newport uses daily planning and weekly planning, and he swears by it. However, he also sprinkles in a little bit of hard scheduling. Long, uninterrupted chunks of time for deep work can be hard to find, so he recommends scheduling them four weeks in advance. That way, you can ensure that you do in fact give yourself those large chunks of time that are necessary for deep work.
Epistemic status: Regardless of whether it is scheduling or planning, something along those lines certainly seems better than "winging it". Anecdotal evidence and common sense seem point to this being true. However, I'm not sure, and I'm not aware of any actual academic research on the topic.
As to the question of scheduling vs. planning, I base my viewpoint largely on my own intuition. I have a sense that anecdotally, people who try hard schedules fall into the trap I described. But I don't know many people who have tried flexible planning, and so I guess I haven't actually observed that it works for most people. However, it has worked decently well for me over the past week, and I do have an intuitive impression that it will be effective for many. Ultimately though, my confidence is not too, too high.
Use social pressure and precommitment
Here are some examples of social pressure:
- Work alongside a friend in such a way that if you go on Facebook, your friend will see your screen and judge you for procrastinating. This could also work if you are working in a public place like the library and would be embarrassed if someone walked by and saw you on Facebook. Another approach would be to literally share your screen with a group of friends, so that if you procrastinate, they'll see it. Complice, which LessWrongers use as a virtual study hall, offers this feature.
- Tell all of your friends that you'll have your paper done by Friday afternoon.
- Check in with your friends at the end of the day and share what work you have gotten done. You can do this at the end of every week as well.
The classic example of precommitment is an army general torching his own ships so that his men couldn't consider retreating home. A more modern example would be not buying a TV for your home if you want to stop watching TV.
In the context of productivity, an example of precommitment is writing an attention charter where you state ahead of time that you'll only allow yourself to be interrupted under certain circumstances, like if you receive an offer to collaborate on a project that fits your interests. If "text message from friend" isn't on your attention charter, you aren't allowed to interrupt yourself by reading and responding to it.
Another example would be to schedule internet usage in advance. That way, you don't find yourself mindlessly browsing the internet.
Epistemic status: There seems to be a good deal of academic research supporting the idea that precommitment is effective. In How to Beat Procrastination, Luke Muehlhauser cites Procrastination, Deadlines, and Performance: Self-Control by Precommitment. If you google around, you'll come across some more literature. I haven't taken a close look at the literature, but I get the impression that it's legit. My personal impression and the anecdotal evidence I've come across mostly points to this being true as well.
As for social pressure, I'm not aware of any academic research. My impression is that it works for most people, although I wouldn't be surprised to find that there are some people who just don't really care what other think and thus aren't effected by it. And I'm sure that it depends on who is providing the pressure. I expect that pressure from your little brother would be much less effective than pressure from a peer with high social status who you'd like to impress.
In the context of computer usage, you can use Rescue Time. It will record how much time you spend on different websites, and using different applications (Chrome, Skype, Slack, etc.).
When you're being recorded, you may find yourself having second thoughts about typing in "facebook.com" to your browser's URL bar and pressing enter. "Ugh, I don't want to see that I've spend 30 hours on Facebook this week."
Rescue Time records things for you, but as an alternative, you can record things yourself. Like how many hours you spent on deep work this week. Or how many hours of TV you watched. Or how many times you meditated. Check out How to Measure Anything if you need help coming up with good metrics.
Related: the Don't Break the Chain technique. With this technique, you basically have a streak of consecutive days doing what you set out to do. I had a friend in college who had a years long streak of running a mile every day, and when he woke up with the sniffles he certainly wasn't going to let a runny nose get in the way of his streak. He got up and went for a run.
Epistemic status: I am not aware of any academic research on this. My impression is that this is something that works for most people, but not necessarily everyone.
Expect work to be effective
Consider the following situation. You have an organic chemistry exam in two days. You're incredibly confused by the material. You're so far behind. You don't understand anything. Even if you studied, you probably wouldn't pass the test.
With these beliefs, wouldn't it be incredibly easy close your books and turn on Netflix?
If you don't expect that your work will actually help you, then it's pretty easy to procrastinate.
Muehlhauser mentions three techniques to counteract low expectation:
- Success spirals. A series of "small wins" can give you the confidence you need to expect success.
- Vicarious victory. Watching inspirational videos and getting inspired by others' success may change your attitude.
- Mental contrasting. Vividly imagine what you want to achieve (eg. an A on your test), and then contrast that with what you don't want to achieve (eg. an F on your test).
Epistemic status: There seems to be a lot of academic research supporting this. Muehlhauser's article and The Procrastination Equation both include a lot of references.
Increase the value of your task
If your task is boring, it will be hard to avoid procrastinating. If your task is something that you don't care about, it will be hard to avoid procrastinating. Common sense.
But how can you take something boring and make it fun? How can you make yourself care about something that you currently don't care about?
Muehlhauser's article mentions a few ways:
- Flow. If your task is too difficult, make it easier. If it is too easy, make it more challenging. Find that sweet spot.
- Meaning. It'd be nice if you just intrinsically cared about getting good grades. I certainly didn't. But even if you don't, consider that good grades can get you into a good college, which can get you a good job, which can make you a lot of money! Does that make studying a bit more meaningful?
- Energy. When you're thirsty, hungry or tired, it's hard to find your tasks to be valuable. You just want water/food/sleep! So make sure you take care of yourself so that you have the energy you need to get to work.
- Rewards. You could always just give yourself a piece of chocolate if you complete your task.
- Passion. It certainly helps to choose tasks that you're passionate about.
Epistemic status: There seems to be a lot of academic research supporting this. Muehlhauser's article and The Procrastination Equation both include a lot of references.
"Pregame" before deep work
This is the depth ritual that I have been using before I get started with a period of work:
- Turn on SelfControl (which blocks distracting websites).
- If my phone is with me, turn it off and put it in my bag (rather than keeping it in my pocket).
- Make sure I have logged off the Messages app.
- Do I have what I need? Water? Food? Rest? Bathroom?
- Should I move to a better location?
- Why is this task important? (Write out an answer.)
- How am I going to accomplish this task? (Write out an answer)
Epistemic status: I am not aware of any academic research on this, and I get the sense that there isn't any. My impression is that this is something that works for many people, but not everyone.
Location can be powerful. Here are some tips:
- Have specific locations for specific tasks. For example, every morning I sit by the pool and work on productivity related things. It's "my productivity related things" spot.
- Spend time in nature. There is some research that supports the idea that it is restorative and good for productivity.
- Switch locations when appropriate. Something about switching locations seems to provide a needed boost. Of course, if you're in the zone, it's probably best to stay put.
- Find inspiring/cool spots to work from once in a while.
Epistemic status: I'm not really aware of any academic research on this stuff other than for spending time in nature. I wouldn't be too surprised if there was research. My impression is that these tips really do provide some benefit for almost everyone, but that the benefit is probably small.
Uber successful people aren't busy. They don't work 12 hour days. They often work 4 or 5 hour days. So then, why are they the ones winning Nobel Prizes and Olympic medals instead of you?
It isn't because they are "gifted". It's because when they work, they work hard.
In my opinion, this seems like one of the most important things to do if you want to improve your productivity.
Epistemic status: Deep Work, Peak, and Rest all make pretty strong arguments for this idea, in my opinion. It seems that there are many, many examples of successful people who fit this mold. However, I am not sure whether or not there are counterexamples. I am not familiar enough with the lives of successful people.
The examples of successful people who fit this mold range from academica, to music, to athletics, to performance, to chess. The idea makes intuitive sense to me. The authors making the arugments seem like trustworthy people. Personally, I feel pretty confident in the idea that deep work, deliberate practice - whatever you want to call it, it is a major, major factor in ones success.
Utilize active recall
Active recall seems to be incredibly important if you want to be an effective learner.
What is active recall? Well, the opposite of active recall is passive review. Reading a textbook chapter is an example of passive review. Watching a lecture is an example of passive review. Reading over your textbook notes is an example of passive review. Listening to a friend explain something to you is passive review.
Active recall is when you create an outline of the material you're reading. It's when you try to explain it in your own words. When you create diagrams. When you summarize it. When you throw it out and start over. When you try to predict what will come next. When you think about how it relates to something else. When you complete exercises. When you think critically about whether or not it is true. When you use it to help you with a related project. When you use it to make an argument to a friend.
Epistemic status: Very strong. The academic research seems to be there. It makes intuitive sense. My anecdotal evidence supports it.
Utilize spaced repetition
In the above diagram, after 20 minutes, you only remember 60% of what you initially knew. After an hour, you only remember about 50%. After 9 hours it's below 40%.
This makes sense, right? After you learn something, it doesn't just stick and stay there forever. You forget it.
In the above diagram, the subject utilizes spaced repetition. You don't just study for the first four days, and then never pick it up again. You space your studying out in such a way that enables it to actually stick long term. First you review the next day, then the next week, then the next month - something like that.
Epistemic status: Very strong. There has been a lot of research done on this. Gwern has a great article covering it.
Use a coach
Arguably the most famous violin teacher of all time, Ivan Galamian, made the point that budding maestros do not engage in deliberate practice spontaneously: “If we analyze the development of the well-known artists, we see that in almost every case the success of their entire career was dependent on the quality of their practicing. In practically every case, the practicing was constantly supervised either by the teacher or an assistant to the teacher.”
Research on world-class performers has confirmed Galamian’s observation. It also has shown that future experts need different kinds of teachers at different stages of their development. In the beginning, most are coached by local teachers, people who can give generously of their time and praise. Later on, however, it is essential that performers seek out more-advanced teachers to keep improving their skills. Eventually, all top performers work closely with teachers who have themselves reached international levels of achievement.
However, having a coach isn't strictly necessary. Ericsson uses the example of Benjamin Franklin as someone who was particularly good at self-guidance:
Benjamin Franklin provides one of the best examples of motivated self-coaching. When he wanted to learn to write eloquently and persuasively, he began to study his favorite articles from a popular British publication, the Spectator. Days after he’d read an article he particularly enjoyed, he would try to reconstruct it from memory in his own words. Then he would compare it with the original, so he could discover and correct his faults. He also worked to improve his sense of language by translating the articles into rhyming verse and then from verse back into prose. Similarly, famous painters sometimes attempt to reproduce the paintings of other masters.
Epistemic status: It seems pretty clear that feedback and guidance are both very important. It makes sense that it can often be difficult to get these things without a coach, and thus that having a coach would be very useful.
I don't know too much about this though. Maybe it depends on the field? Maybe it depends on other things? Regardless, Anders Ericsson talks about it a lot and he seems to be the expert on expert performance, so the fact that he talks about it a lot definitely means something to me.
Focus on the wildly important
It can be easy to get caught up in mundane daily responsibilities and to lose track of the things that actually matter. Focusing on the wildly important seems to be a good heuristic.
Epistemic status: I recall hearing this advice in various forms quite often. In Deep Work, Cal Newport talks about this idea. He gets it from The Four Disciplines of Education. The idea makes sense to me. I'd say I'm pretty confident that focusing on the wildly important is good advice.
Note: I haven't actually had a chance to read the book Rest in full yet. I expect that doing so would allow me to add to and improve this section.
Take time to decompress
I often get caught up in this routine where I never quite stop working. Even after dinner, I still try to fit in another 2-3 hours of work. Even at 11pm, I figure it would be good to study for another 45 minutes or so before I go to sleep. Even at 2am when I can't sleep I figure I may as well get some work done.
No. Just, no.
With this approach, your mind never actually gets an opportunity to decompress, and that is harmful to your productivity.
Cal Newport has a cool idea to combat this called a shutdown ritual. Basically, at the end of your work day, you review your todo lists, review your calendar, do whatever else you need to do, and then say the magic phrase: "schedule shutdown, complete". Going through this shutdown ritual gives you the confidence that you are in fact done for the day and any work related tasks can wait until tomorrow morning.
Epistemic status: Cal Newport talks about the importance of decompressing a lot (and cites some research, I think?). The book Rest also covers it (and cites research, I'm sure). It makes sense to me. I feel pretty confident that it is important.
Get enough sleep
There is no shortage of research showing that sleep is related to productivity. So then, if you want to be productive, get enough sleep!
Epistemic status: Strong. There is a lot of research on this.
After reading an article on napping by the American Psychological Association, it seems that some people benefit from taking naps, but that others just end up feeling groggy. So then, I suppose that napping is something that is worth experimenting with, but that if it doesn't seem to be helping you it should be avoided.
Two important notes:
- If you take your nap too late in the day, it'll mess with your circadian rhythm and make it harder for you to fall asleep at night.
- Nap duration is very related to whether or not you end up feeling groggy. We have 90 minute sleep cycles, and if you wake up in a period of deep sleep, you'll certainly feel groggy. So it probably makes sense to take a short nap and wake up before you enter deep sleep, or to take a longer nap of around 90 minutes so that you have "resurfaced" from your deep sleep phase when your alarm goes off. However, if you are sleep deprived, you make enter deep sleep very rapidly, and so even a short nap may make you feel groggy.
Supermemo claims that if napping "isn't working" for you, it is because you are making one of these two mistakes.
Epistemic status: I am not too familiar with the research on napping, so my confidence isn't too, too high, but that APA article seems pretty reliable, and it does make sense that napping works for some but not others, so I'd say that I'm reasonably confident about what I wrote in this section.
Take breaks when appropriate
A lot of you have probably heard of the pomodoro technique, where you spend 25 minutes or so working, and then 5 minutes or so taking a break. There is some cognitive science research saying that we need these breaks at intervals somewhere in this ballpark.
On the other hand, sometimes you're in the zone and need 3-4 hours to just churn through on some difficult task.
I think it is a good idea to use your judgement, and to take breaks when appropriate.
However, it is important to note that the type of break you take is important. Playing a video game or scrolling through Facebook is very different from taking a short walk. With the former, you'll have a much harder time "getting back into the zone".
Cal Newport calls the latter Deep Breaks, and has a great article that elaborates on these idea.
Epistemic status: As I mention in the section, I hear that there is cognitive science research supporting the idea that we need somewhat frequent breaks. At the same time, my anecdotal experiences point to the fact that when you're in the zone, it's best to just keep prodding along. I'm not aware of any research on this idea though. And while it makes sense to me, I've got to aware of the typical mind fallacy. Still I have heard many others share the belief that when you're in the zone, it's best to keep going. Ultimately, my confidence is moderate.
What is solitude? Laying down at the beach and reading a magazine? Walking through the city while listening to a podcast? Strolling through a museum?
No, no, and no.
Solitude is when you are isolated from the input of other minds. When you read a magazine, you're "taking in" someone else's thoughts - the magazine author. When you listen to a podcast, you're "taking in" the podcast creator's thoughts. When you walk through a museum, you're "taking in" the thoughts of the artists.
Solitude is when you sit on a park bench alone and write in your journal. Solitude is when you lay down at the park, stare up at the sky, and daydream. Solitude is when you take a jog through the forest. Solitude is when you go for a hike and ponder where you are in life.
As you are probably sensing, solitude is important. For your productivity, creativity, and emotional wellbeing.
Check out Cal Newport's article on the topic.
Epistemic status: Newport talks about it. He's a reliable source in my mind. He seems to have gotten his information from reading three books on solitude. It makes intuitive sense to me. I'd say that I'm moderately confident in the idea that true solitude is important to ones productivity.
It can be easy to think, "I don't have enough time to exercise". That type of logic is wrong.
There seems to be a good amount of research indicating that exercise is very important for ones productivity. This Harvard Business Review article may be a good starting point.
I also find it noteworthy that Paul Graham, who has a ton of experience mentoring startup founders, includes exercise in his short list of "things you should be doing":
If you’re ever unsure if you should be doing what you’re doing during YC, ask yourself this question: ‘Am I building our product? Am I talking to users? Am I exercising?’. If you’re not doing one of these things, you’re doing the wrong thing.
Epistemic status: Pretty confident. There seems to be a lot of "official" and anecdotal evidence supporting it. I would be more confident if I were more familiar with the research.
Perform "productive meditation"
In the book Deep Work, Cal Newport calls productive meditation something where you're occupied physically, but not mentally. For example, a walk, jog, bike ride, house cleaning, gardening, sowing and taking a shower are all examples of productive meditation. A lot of good ideas happen during productive meditation.
Try googling for "good ideas in the shower". You'll see that the idea that people have good ideas in the shower is quite common. A closer look would probably find that productive meditation is something that has been discovered across time and cultures.
Epistemic status: There seems to be a lot of anecdotal evidence supporting this. I am not aware of any academic research, but the anecdotal evidence alone makes me pretty confident.
As I explain in the Meta section, I've known about all of this stuff for a while, but it hasn't actually translated into success for me. I think a big issue is that I haven't spent nearly enough time reflecting.
I hear about a piece of advice and attempt to implement it. When my attempt fails, the inertia of my life kinda just takes over and I never return to the piece of advice. It usually remains as "a thing I should be doing" somewhere in my mind, but I have too many other things going on to find the time to figure out what is going wrong and how I could fix it.
This is stupid of me. Reflection is necessary. You have to think about what is going right, what is going wrong, and how you can improve. You have to iterate.
Yes, I may have other things to do, but should they really be prioritized over reflection? Probably not.
Epistemic status: I get the impression that this is super important. I recall Cal Newport talking about it, but I can't find the right posts to link to. I don't have enough knowledge and experience so I don't think I'd say I'm more than moderately/pretty confident about this one.
Maybe I'm just bad at implementing things. Maybe others are good at it, and reflection isn't too important for them. I can think of many people who struggle to successfully implement things, and who seem to be a great candidate for a prescription of weekly reflection. But there may also be counterexamples. And I may happen to surround myself with people who are bad at implementing things for whatever reason.
Use a productivity cheat sheet
There is a lot of productivity advice out there. I don't know about you, but I find it to be rather overwhelming. I find myself asking, "Aren't there techniques I'm forgetting to implement?"
A sensible solution to this issue is to have a productivity cheat sheet. Write down the things you should be doing, and the techniques you want to employ. Keep that piece of paper with you whenever you're working. Hopefully that'll make it easier to follow through.
Epistemic status: Seems reasonable. I base this almost solely on my intuition, rather than actual experience and data. I don't even really have any anecdotal data on this one. I don't know anyone who has tried it. Cal Newport has a post on it, and as you know by now, I'm a fan of his, so that causes me to update rather heavily.
When you succeed at doing what you set out to do, give yourself a cookie! Or a piece of candy. Or whatever it is that you find enjoyable.
Epistemic status: It seems that there is a decent amount of literature supporting this idea. Luke Muehlhauser links to Self-Reinforcement: Theoretical and Methodological Considerations in support of rewarding yourself. In skimming through it, it seems to indicate that self reinforcement works often enough, but also seems to indicate that there are caveats. If I was more familiar with the literature, I'd be more confident about this.
Personally, rewarding yourself doesn't feel like something that will always be effective. I recall anecdotal experiences where attempts to reward oneself didn't really work out.
When you don't actually do what you set out to do... PuNiSh YoUrSelF!!!!! Then you'll think twice before failing to follow through. Right?
Epistemic status: I get the impression that there is academic research on this, but I personally am not familiar with it. If I was more familiar with it, I would be more confident that punishing yourself is effective.
Beeminder seems to have the approval of the LessWrong community. This makes me feel more confident that punishing yourself for failure is effective.
Similar to the above section on rewarding yourself, my personal impression and anecdotal data doesn't necessarily support the idea that punishing yourself is effective. But that's just me.
Departing advice: Don't make yourself crazy
One of my favorite LessWrong posts is Reason as memetic immune disorder. The big takeaway is that sometimes, becoming more rational may lead you to have less success.
In the context of seeking to improve your productivity, I could certainly see this happening.
It has happened to me. Over the years, I have learned a bunch of stuff about productivity. It provided me with some ammunition, but not enough to actually see results. I didn't quite make it past the threshold.
I had learned enough to realize everything I was doing wrong, but not quite enough to transition me to a state of success. So instead of making me feel happy and productive, it made me feel guilty and frustrated.
Please don't let this happen to you. Productivity is difficult. If it weren't then we would all be as successful as Nobel laureates and Olympic medalists.