The Author

Mark Forster is the author of three books about time management and personal organisation. The most recent, Do It Tomorrow, was published by Hodder in 2006.

Books
USEFUL BLOGS
Feeds
Saturday
27Jun

Autofocus 2 Time Management System (AF2)

DateSaturday, June 27, 2009 at 12:00

This is a preliminary instruction written for those who are familiar with the original Autofocus (AF) time management system. I will write instructions for those who aren’t familiar with it at a later stage.

My aims in producing a revised version of Autofocus:

  • Easier handling of urgent and must do items.
  • A more balanced approach to the day as a whole.
  • Quicker handling of large or difficult items.
  • Elimination of the tendency for the list to slow to a crawl.
  • Faster sifting of unwanted items.
  • Dismissal less of a hit-and-miss process.
  • Less need to use subsidiary lists.
  • Removing the need for most of the tweaks which people have reported in the Forum and elsewhere.

All without losing any of the advantages of AF!

Similarities to Autofocus

  • One long list of everything
  • Tasks can be entered without evaluation
  • Tasks are actioned when they “stand out”
  • Dismissal of tasks is the same in principle, though it is triggered in a different way
  • In general the system is intended to achieve the same sort of things as AF. Just as in AF, no attempt has been made to include a formal project management system. It can be used with any project management system or none.

Differences from Autofocus

  • Pages are no longer treated as units. The new system is not affected by the length of page used.
  • It works on one open list, not a series of closed lists.

Advantages of the New System

  • All tasks on the list are potentially accessible at any one time. This removes problems with urgent and same day items.
  • It’s much easier to break down a task and enter the sub-tasks straight into the list, rather than make a separate list.
  • Dismissal is not such an “all or nothing” process, which makes it easier to include both work and home items on one list if you wish.

Disadvantages

The one disadvantage is that it takes longer to identify the next task if it is one of the earlier items on the list. I have not in practice found this to be a significant handicap – in fact it may even be an advantage because it allows your intuition to have a better handle on the overall picture.

How the System Works

You draw up your list and add to it in exactly the same manner as with Autofocus. The difference lies in how you work the list: 

  1. Go to the last item on your list (i.e. the most recently entered task)
  2. Work backwards from the last item looking at each task in turn until a task “stands out”.
  3. Do the task in whole or in part.
  4. Re-enter the task if necessary.
  5. Repeat steps 1-5

Note that after taking action on a task you do not continue to move back through the list, but instead  return to the end of the list each time. As the list is constantly growing the last item on the list will usually be different from the one you started from last time.

Dismissing Tasks

At the beginning of each day, go to your oldest active page, and draw a line after the first block of unactioned tasks (i.e. the oldest tasks that are still awaiting action). These tasks are now “on notice” for dismissal. The block may include any number of tasks, from one upwards.

At the beginning of the following day, all items before the line which have not been actioned are dismissed. The preferred way to dismiss items is to highlight them as this makes it easy to review them.

Then re-draw the line as before.

Example:

At the start of the day the line drawn the previous day is followed by two deleted tasks, then three active tasks, then five deleted tasks. A new line is drawn after the three active tasks, which are now on notice for dismissal. If any of them have not been actioned by the start of the next day, they are dismissed.

Even more than with AF, the threat of dismissal affects the way you work the whole list. Without it there would be very little incentive to go back to the earlier pages. So please remember that if you don’t stick to the dismissal rules, you are likely to throw the whole system out of balance.

Reading through the list

At the beginning of the day, after re-drawing the line and dismissing any items, you are recommended to read the list through before starting work. It is best to read it from the beginning to the end, paying particular attention to tasks which are in danger of being dismissed in the next few days.

Starting off

You are recommended to start with about five easy items on your list and then to add additional tasks as they come up or as they arise in the normal course of work. That way everything on the list is fresh and relevant.

If you wish you can continue to use your previous Autofocus list, but most people will probably want to start afresh as above.

Cautions
Do not dump tasks into the list from old to do lists or by drawing up lists of every possible thing you could do. If you do that you will be putting a huge lump of indigestible material into the list. Resist the temptation to do this – instead do as recommended in “Starting Off”.

Also resist the temptation to skip going back to the end of the list after actioning a task. It may seem pointless to go all the way back to the end if you want to do a task which is very close to the one you have just finished, but psychologically it is very important to do so.

AuthorMark Forster | Comments Off |
Thursday
25Jun

Autofocus 2 latest situation

DateThursday, June 25, 2009 at 9:47

I’m still having to make some adjustments to the new system, so it may be a few days yet. I want it to be as good as I can make it before releasing it. It’s getting the precise rules for “dismissal” right which is causing the delay.

AuthorMark Forster | Comment31 Comments |
in
Monday
22Jun

Autofocus v. 2 on its way

DateMonday, June 22, 2009 at 7:01

I should have learnt by now not to write articles with headings like “Back to Autofocus” - because whenever I do something happens to throw me off. In this case what happened was that, as soon as I started using Autofocus again, I suddenly realised what was missing from my attempts to produce a revised system.

As a result I am now putting the final touches to the revised system and intend to release it later this week.

What I’ve been aiming to achieve in the improved version are the following:

1. Easier handling of urgent and must do items.

2. A more balanced approach to the day as a whole.

3. Quicker handling of large or difficult items.

4. Eliminating the tendency for the list to slow to a crawl.

5. Faster sifting of unwanted items.

6. Dismissal less of a hit-and-miss process.

7. Less need to use subsidiary lists.

8. Removing the need for most of the ‘tweaks’ which people have reported in the Forum and elsewhere.

By and large I think I have succeeded.

One of the features of the new system is that it uses exactly the same type of list as before. So there is no need to re-write your Autofocus list in order to switch to it. The same applies if you don’t like the new system and want to revert to the old one. In spite of this I expect most people will want to start from scratch with the new system.

AuthorMark Forster | Comment29 Comments |
in ,
Saturday
13Jun

Autofocus: a closer look at "dismissal"

DateSaturday, June 13, 2009 at 12:01

One of the most important parts of the Autofocus system is the concept of “dismissal”.

The Autofocus instructions state:

If you go to a page and no item stands out for you on your first pass through it, then all the outstanding items on that page are dismissed without re-entering them.

This is where the system finally gets rid of all the items which you entered without evaluation, but which the system has sifted and found wanting. This may happen very quickly (for instance if you have entered a long list of books you are thinking of reading), but more usually quite slowly.

Please take the rule not to re-enter these items seriously. It doesn’t mean you can never re-enter them, but you should let some time pass before you do and consider carefully why they were rejected, whether they really need to be done at all, whether the time is ripe for them to be done, whether they distract from your main goals, and any other factors. When you do re-enter a dismissed item, it is often best to break it down or re-phrase it in some way.

The instructions make it clear that dismissal is where the final stage of the “autofocus” aspect of the system takes place. This is why it is possible to put tasks and projects into the system without evaluation. Without the dismissal process, Autofocus would simply be a method of working a to-do list and little more.

Every page on your AF list is going  to face you at some stage with the choice of either doing the final task on the page or dismissing it. Of course more than one task may get dismissed on the page, but the choice always comes down to: “Do it NOW, or admit that you are not going to do it at all”. Normally of course this stark choice only comes after you have had plenty of opportunity to do the task.

Yes, a task can be re-instated by being eventually re-entered on the list, but this should never be something that takes place without considered thought - preferably after some time has passed. There are four major factors which the instructions ask you to consider along with anything else that may be relevant:

  • why the task was rejected
  • whether it really needs to be done at all
  • whether the time is now ripe for it to be done
  • whether the task distracts from your main goals

The instructions invite you initially to enter tasks on your list without evaluating them. This makes AF very different from most time management systems. But, once a task has been sifted and dismissed, then evaluation of the task must take place. If the task has been evaluated and it has been decided to re-enter it, the instructions suggest that you should consider:

  • breaking the task down further
  • re-writing it

I can’t stress how important it is to the proper working of the system to get this right. Your understanding of the dismissal process will affect how you tackle all your tasks within AF.

There are two common mistakes made by beginners to AF with regard to dismissal. One is to be too willing to dismiss tasks, and the other is to be too reluctant to dismiss tasks.

In fact these are not two mistakes at all - they are the same mistake. In both cases, the beginner has taken a conscious attitude towards dismissal: willing/reluctant.

The instructions say nothing about taking any attitude towards dismissal. They simply state: If you go to a page and no item stands out for you on your first pass through it, then all the outstanding items on that page are dismissed without re-entering them. So the only matter to be considered is whether any item stands out. You don’t need to consciously consider whether the item should be dismissed at all - your intuition will have already taken all relevant factors into account.

AuthorMark Forster | Comment28 Comments |
in ,
Friday
12Jun

Back to Autofocus

DateFriday, June 12, 2009 at 11:22

Three days ago I decided to stop experimenting with new systems and to concentrate on using Autofocus. I know Autofocus works, and I want to see just how far it will take me. I’m particularly interested in how well the auto-focusing aspect of it (after which it’s named) will work in the long-term. Just to recap, the theory behind Autofocus is that you can throw any ideas, brainwaves, pipe-dreams, etc, into it without prior evaluation and the system itself will sift them and enable you to concentrate on what is really important to you.

Of course we often don’t really know what is really important to us. Even if we’ve gone through an exercise in writing down our important goals, the results are often contaminated by what we think we “should” have as our goals. Another problem is that we sometimes don’t know that something would be important to us because it hasn’t yet appeared on our scene.

My vision for Autofocus is that through its unique sifting process we will have our goals and vision clarified for us. Perhaps it would be better to express that as “we will be able to clarify our goals and vision”, because Autofocus is after all no more than a framework to allow our intellect and our intuition to work in balance.

After several months of experimenting with other systems I’ve succeeded in reducing my life to a satisfactory state of chaos. So what are the areas that I particularly hope Autofocus will now sort out for me? There are loads, but I think the top three would be:

1) I need to get simple business of running my daily life back on track. Many things are not too bad: my email is up-to-date; my finances are under control; I don’t have huge backlogs of work. But I do badly need to sort out my office which is in a mess; I need to get into a sustainable routine of blogging, tweeting, and writing my newsletter, and I need to take a lot more exercise.

2) I need to get a vision of what I am doing. I’ve been hovering around being “semi-retired” for far too long. I need to have a clear focus. My feeling at the moment is that I want to get my business going again. This needs testing and affirming, and progressing with some positive action.

3) I need to avoid taking on commitments without a positive vision of what they are for. People who are newly retired and still in reasonable possession of their faculties are particularly vulnerable to “commitment creep”, i.e. the steady accumulation of commitments for no other reason than that they seemed a good idea at the time. I’m beginning to notice this in myself and I want to be far more rigorous about it.

Just how much can I expect Autofocus to help with all this? I intend to find out, and my intention at the moment is to blog regularly on my progress. The real test of Autofocus is not statistics on how many tasks one has carried out, but how well it’s sorted out areas such as the three above.

AuthorMark Forster | Comment50 Comments |
in , , ,
Wednesday
03Jun

Acting in One's Own Best Interests

DateWednesday, June 3, 2009 at 16:27

 (This is an extract from my book “How To Make Your Dreams Come True”)

If we need our lives to be integrated, then what is the guiding principle that we should follow which will give that integrity – which will stop us being at war with ourselves?

I would suggest that it is to act always in our own best interests. This is a very difficult concept for most people to deal with. Most of us are brought up to think of acting in our own best interests as selfish. By the word ‘selfish’ they mean a mean-spirited, ungenerous attitude which grabs what it wants at the expense of other people and doesn’t care less what other people think or feel. In fact this is the very reverse of acting in one’s own best interests, since it can hardly be thought to be in anyone’s best interests to alienate other people so that they will not cooperate.

The results of confusing acting in one’s own best interests with a narrow mean-spiritedness are disastrous. In the effort not to appear ‘selfish’ people often become completely cut off from their own wants and desires. And since it is very difficult to give what one doesn’t have, they become insensitive to the wants and desires of those who are close to them too.

Another result of this confusion is to cut people off from reality. As children we are usually discouraged from exploring what our own best interests really are in favour of conforming to other people’s vision of what we should be doing. This usually means that instead of doing what we really believe is best for us we end up either doing what other people want us to do or rebelling against it, neither of which brings us any nearer to following our own vision for our lives.

At its most basic the brain is an instrument for achieving the best interests of the organism. The higher the organism the more sophisti­cated the brain and the more sophisticated the strategies it follows. However, this sophisticated functioning will revert to lower levels of functioning when faced with contradictions it cannot resolve.

The message that is given to us when we are young and that comes over loud and clear is that what is in our best interests is not in our best interests. Faced with having to integrate the contradictions implicit in a message such as this the brain tends to close down whole areas of experience.

Let us look at how someone would act who follows their own best interests consistently. People who act consistently in their own best interests would be likely to:

 

• be clear about what is important in their lives and pursue those things single-mindedly;

• cooperate with others to achieve results;

• look after their own health and fitness;

• refuse to engage in self-destructive behaviours;

• select their friends carefully and maintain those friendships;

• stay in touch with the reality of situations;

• refuse to take on commitments that are not consistent with their own vision;

• continually expand their comfort zones;

• ensure that they have the education and training to do what is important to them;

• build on the experience and wisdom of other people;

• be prepared to pay the price for what they want;

• regard the selection of a life partner as the single most important decision they will probably ever make;

• keep everything in their lives well maintained;

• be sensitive to their own feelings and needs;

• be aware of the likely consequences of their actions;

• think about long-term results rather than short-term ones.

 

This list is illustrative rather than exhaustive. But if we contrast the above behaviours with their opposites we can see more clearly how common it is for people not to act in their own best interests. People who don’t act in their own best interests may:

 

• have no clear vision for what they want to achieve;

• see themselves in competition with other people;

• be overweight, unfit or otherwise not be taking care of their health;

• have self-destructive behaviours such as drug-taking, self-sabo­tage, workaholism etc.;

• neglect their friendships;

• do anything rather than face up to the reality of situations;

• be loaded with commitments that they resent;

• be stuck in a rut;

• fail to keep learning, either formally or informally;

• be reluctant to ask other people for help;

• not be prepared to put in the effort or cost needed to achieve what they want;

• select a life partner on the basis of the whim of the moment;

• live poorly maintained lives which are constantly in a state of crisis or breakdown;

• be anaesthetised to their own feelings and needs;

• ignore the likely consequences of their actions or lack of action;

• think purely in terms of short-term advantage.

 

So we can see that far from being ‘selfish’ in the pejorative sense of the word, acting in our own best interests results in highly desirable behaviour both from our own point of view and the point of view of other people. In fact an accusation that someone who is acting in their own best interests is ‘selfish’ usually means that the accuser wants the ‘selfish’ person to sacrifice himself or herself for the accuser’s benefit.

Again I would stress the point that what we think of as typically selfish behaviour, such as grabbing everything for oneself at the expense of other people, is hardly ever in one’s own best interests. But the way to discourage such behaviour is not to teach children that they should sacrifice their own interests for the interests of others, but to show them why this type of behaviour is not really in their interests at all.

Exercise

Ask yourself the question: ‘If I were consistently to act in my own best interests, what would I do differently?’ List as many things as you can, both large and small. These are some of the items, out of a very long list, which one of my clients wrote in answer to this question:

 

• I would only say yes when I was able to say it whole­heartedly, otherwise I would say no.

• I would go to bed at a sensible time every night except for special occasions.

• I would make time to spend on my own.

• I would stop putting off the decision to change jobs.

• I would stop shouting at my children.

• I would make it a priority to get out of debt.

• I would stop leaving the choice of holiday up to my partner.

• I would stop bringing work home in the evenings.

• I would plan a family outing at least once a month.

• I would check the car tyre pressures regularly.

• I would face up to my financial position.

• I would work out why I keep losing vital bits of paper.

 

 

 

We can use this concept of enlightened self-interest as a tool to evaluate potential courses of action. Perhaps even more important we can use it as a tool to evaluate our current actions. I will use the word ‘self-ish’ with a hyphen in this context to distinguish it from the pejorative, narrow use of the word ‘selfish’. Is what I am doing at this precise moment properly self-ish (in the sense of being in my own best interest)?

What I am doing at this precise moment is writing this paragraph, which is part of my goal of writing this book, which is part of my wider vision of where I wish to go in my life. So yes, what I am doing at this precise moment is indeed properly self-ish. But note that although my primary motivation for doing it is my own self-interest it is none the less an action which will (I hope) benefit other people as well. There is nothing anti-social or malevolent about being self-ish.

It has often been pointed out by theologians that the biblical injunction is ‘Love thy neighbour as thyself’, not ‘Love thy neighbour more than thyself’ or ‘Love thy neighbour instead of thyself’. In fact logically it would be impossible for everyone to love their neighbour instead of themselves because who would do the receiving if that were the case? It would be like the scene in Father Ted where two women come to blows because each one insists that she should pay for tea. However, the idea that we should love other people more than or instead of ourselves is one that is very prevalent in our culture. And since it is a logically untenable position which it is actually impossible to keep to, it results in either guilt, denial or rebellion.

So one of the most important thing we can do in our lives is to give them integrity and unity by having one guiding principle to follow. And the best guiding principle to have is the enlightened pursuit of our own best interests.

 

 

AuthorMark Forster | Comment4 Comments |
in , , , ,
Tuesday
05May

New system first week stats

DateTuesday, May 5, 2009 at 9:48

Here are the stats for my first week at the new system I referred to in my previous post. Because I was sidetracked a couple of times into trying tweaks (which very quickly didn’t work out), they are probably not quite as good as if I had stuck to exactly the same system throughout.

Total number of tasks on list: 646

Total actioned: 537

Total unactioned: 109 (including current task)

Page by page analysis of unactioned tasks (34 tasks to a page):

Pages 1: 0

Page 2: 0

Page 3: 0

Page 4: 0

Page 5: 0

Page 6: 7

Page 7: 11

Page 8: 15

Page 9: 9

Page 10: 2

Page 11: 5

Page 12: 9

Page 13: 6

Page 14: 4

Page 15: 3

Page 15: 5

Page 17: 10

Page 18: 16 (including current task)

Page 19: 7 (of 7)

The first 170 tasks on the list have all been completed. There is no “dismissal” in this system, so these tasks have all been actioned at least partially.

The comparatively large number of uncompleted tasks on p. 8 is due to task dumping from old to-do lists (a process I don’t recommend!)

Tentative conclusions

There is an even higher volume of work than with Autofocus, due to there being virtually no resistance or system overhead.

Urgent and routine items get done a lot faster and more reliably than with Autofocus.

Higher resistance items get done without a fuss.

The best part of Autofocus for me - that’s it’s enjoyable to work at - is fully preserved.

My only worry with the system so far is that the number of unactioned tasks is still growing. I expect this to level off at some stage, but it’s too early to tell when this will be. However it’s worth pointing out that at the present rate of work (76 tasks per day) the unactioned tasks represent less than a day and a half’s work.

AuthorMark Forster | Comment30 Comments |
Monday
04May

Autofocus after four months

DateMonday, May 4, 2009 at 15:17

For me launching Autofocus has been quite an experience. It’s proved immensely popular - the fact that volunteers have so far translated the instructions into sixteen languages is proof of that. It seems to have struck a chord with an immense number of people who may not have had a great deal of success with other methods.

For such a simple system, it seems to have had far-reaching effects. It’s got a reputation for being addictive. After four months people are still going strong. Not everyone likes it - that would be too much to hope for - but it’s most distinctive feature seems to be that it requires no mental effort to work it. There are no huge system overheads - and there is no forcing oneself to do anything. The system emphasizes working in an intuitive, flowing manner.

However as the inventor of the system I still don’t think Autofocus is the perfect system - not even for me! There are certain aspects of it which I think could be improved. The two major ones are dealing with urgent items and dealing with items one really doesn’t want to do. It’s not so much that these don’t get done in Autofocus - it’s that they don’t get done quickly enough. My ideal system would be a bit sharper on both of these.

That’s why I have been keeping on with the experimenting. I would really like to reach the perfect system one day, because all this experimenting wreaks havoc with my own organisation. What’s more I would really like to reach the perfect answer while I’m still young enough to make full use of it myself!

I am currently working on a system which is very similar to Autofocus in many respects. It works off one long list; it uses the “standing out” method of selecting tasks to work on; it encourages “little and often”. But in other respects it differs quite considerably: it does not use the “closed list” concept at all; there is no “dismissing” of tasks; and potentially any task on the list can be done at any time.

In the short time I’ve been using this system, I have satisfied myself that it is as easy to use and as addictive as Autofocus. It’s also much better at dealing with urgent items than Autofocus, but I haven’t been using it long enough to find out to my satisfaction how well it deals with high-resistance items. First indications are good though.

AuthorMark Forster | Comment19 Comments |
Monday
04May

Czech and Finnish Versions

DateMonday, May 4, 2009 at 12:10

With the addition of versions in Czech and Finnish, the Autofocus instructions have now been translated into sixteen different languages, which is an amazing testimony to the system as they have all been done by volunteers. Many thanks to the translators.

AuthorMark Forster | CommentPost a Comment |
Monday
06Apr

Polish Version

DateMonday, April 6, 2009 at 15:14

There is now a Polish version of the Autofocus instructions available. Many thanks to the translator.

AuthorMark Forster | CommentPost a Comment |
Monday
30Mar

Hungarian Version

DateMonday, March 30, 2009 at 11:41

Thanks again to another translator who has provided a Hungarian version of the Autofocus system.

AuthorMark Forster | CommentPost a Comment |
Friday
06Mar

Turkish translation

DateFriday, March 6, 2009 at 13:36

I am very pleased to be sent a Turkish translation of the Autofocus instructions. Many thank to the translator.

AuthorMark Forster | Comment1 Comment |
Wednesday
04Mar

Portuguese Translation

DateWednesday, March 4, 2009 at 15:33

The Portuguese translation of the Autofocus Instructions is now available. Many thanks to the translator.

As far as I am aware there are no more translations in progress, but I would really like to have an Arabic one if anyone is prepared to take this on.

AuthorMark Forster | CommentPost a Comment |
Friday
27Feb

Japanese translation

DateFriday, February 27, 2009 at 9:56

A Japanese translation has now been added to the Autofocus instructions.

With many thanks to the translator.

A Portuguese translation is nearing completion.

AuthorMark Forster | Comment1 Comment |
Monday
23Feb

Chinese (Simplified) Translation

DateMonday, February 23, 2009 at 14:48

There is now a Chinese version of the Autofocus instructions in simplified characters (as used in mainland China).

Many thanks to the translator.

AuthorMark Forster | CommentPost a Comment |
Saturday
21Feb

Russian Version

DateSaturday, February 21, 2009 at 10:01

Hard on the heels of the Chinese version is the Russian version of the Autofocus instructions. Again many thanks  to the translator.

AuthorMark Forster | CommentPost a Comment |
Saturday
21Feb

Chinese Translation

DateSaturday, February 21, 2009 at 9:29

A Chinese version of the Autofocus instructions is now available. Coming soon the Russian and Portuguese versions.

Anyone like to take on the task of translating them into Japanese or Arabic? My books have been translated into both these languages.

Many thanks again to all the people who have taken the trouble to translate the instructions - for no reward except their own desire to see AF spread round the world.

AuthorMark Forster | Comment2 Comments |
Thursday
19Feb

Korean Version

DateThursday, February 19, 2009 at 12:01

A Korean Version of the Autofocus instructions is now available. Coming soon: Chinese and Portuguese. Many thanks to the translators for their hard work on these.

AuthorMark Forster | Comment1 Comment |
Monday
16Feb

French version now available

DateMonday, February 16, 2009 at 14:58

A French version is now available on the Autofocus instructions page in addition to the Dutch, German, Italian and Spanish versions.

AuthorMark Forster | CommentPost a Comment |
Sunday
15Feb

AT LAST: Autofocus - the Video!!

DateSunday, February 15, 2009 at 22:01

Here’s what you have all been waiting for:

Many thanks to TaraghB for interviewing me and producing and editing the video.

Full instructions

AuthorMark Forster | Comment36 Comments |
Page 1 2 3 4 5 ... 22 Next 20 Entries »