Do you have to neglect certain areas of life because other things are ?more important’?
Should you list priorities by 1 to 10 and just focus on number 1 until it’s done and then move on to number 2?
You would never get round to things like cutting the grass, exercising regularly, filing papers, reading your kids night time stories.
So Let’s Try Combining Importance with Urgency
If it’s Saturday afternoon, and Sally’s appointment with tutor is 4pm, then that’s an urgent priority. So you can read your memo after taking Sally. But what about your hair cut? At what point do you consider that ‘urgent’? When it’s long? Or when it’s ‘too’ long? Or when the wife nags, or the boss frowns?
How do you really prioritize between reading a memo and taking Sally to her tutor and getting your hair cut? Should you try to prioritize by urgency?
Taking Sally to her Tutor lesson is not as important as reading and responding to that Memo in your briefcase by Monday morning, plus it’s not till tomorrow afternoon anyway. So on Friday the memo is urgently important at an A level, and Sally’s tutor is only urgently important with a B level.
The wife made fun of your hair again today so you’ll cross off the hair cut from the C priority list and put it on the A priority list. You can read the memo tomorrow (friday) with enough time left while the shops are open, and in time to get back to take the Wife out, so you decide the hair cut is urgent, and should move to priority level A.
Along comes Saturday afternoon, and Sally’s tutorship now gets crossed off the B list and put on the A list because it’s Saturday, and you’ve got Memo and Sally’s Tutorship on the A list.
Is prioritizing by importance really going to be a long-term useful technique for [tag]time management[/tag]?
Of course not.? The TIME-Lattice Time Management System Report reveals the full story, and what to do about it..
Loading ...
