It's hard to train your system 1 to understand what it feels like to actually be productive. Many of us like to think that our system 2 is in control, we're just lacking will power. This is a destructive mental model -- system 1 is more in control than we think. The whole concept of productivity is not usually well calibrated to actual positive outcomes for yourself -- it usually discounts serendipity, discovery, and play. When you're in a small team, there's always enough work to do. You probably don't know what works anyway, so you need to try things. The only thing that matters is how important what you delivered ended up being. The best tools are (1) minimizing inter-dependencies and (2) constantly revisiting what is important vs. what is urgent. When most things are *above the bar*, work on what comes most naturally. As a company grows in size, personal productivity and org productivity begin to diverge significantly. For some, this can be freeing -- It's exhausting to always have an infinite todo list. In a large company with product/market fit you really only have to (1) deliver things on schedule and (b) never be the bottleneck. The hard work falls to the middle management layer to have folks row in the same direction. What you need to know about big org productivity is that it isn't about you. Org productivity tools will never make you more productive. Their only purpose is *upwards visibility* to enable other people to make sure that your work vector isn't cancelled out by someone else's work vector. It is always a waste of time to spend additional time trying to improve this process or talk about improving the process -- just fill out the form, and then (through human channels) make sure that everyone around you knows what you're working on. For personal productivity you don't need upwards visibility. You are not an org. Most deadlines aren't real, you can track most things in your head, and if you need to write stuff down, then checklists are probably fine. So if you're building systems for personal productivity that resemble scrum, you're probably just chasing fauxductivity. You want to feel organized, not accomplish things. What most people actually need for their personal productivity is *integration*. They've been trying to force their system 1 to do stuff that their system 2 wants to do, and they're dealing with the blow-back. Once you see this truth, then many of the "productivity practices" pattern match to training your system 1 to do stuff it doesn't want to do. - Pomodoro (just for a little while) - Habit trackers (dopamine check box, feels like work) - Scrum (organizing, feels like work) - Obsidian workflow optimization (avoidance, feels like work) If you want to find integration with system 1, make sure that you're doing work that you actually like. Then, figure out what *feels* urgent and important and write it down. Then, throw it away and do whatever *feels* like the right thing to do. Over time your system 1 will become a more responsible part. When I'm hiring, I look for people that are well integrated and intrinsically motivated. If someone shows a lot of will power (or "try-hard" energy), they are probably experts at forcing. If you hire that persona your company will become "organized" and "optimized". But, if you hire aligned, integrated, and intrinsically motivated people (and you give them space) you'll have a chaotic fountain of truly productive output. So, back to productivity systems -- if you want to actually get things done: Personally: * integrate, integrate, integrate * small things => checklists * big things => should be easy * taxes => sorry this just actually sucks and there is no solution Small org productivity: - avoid coupling - maximize personal productivity - hire the right people Big org productivity: * It isn't about you * It isn't about you * Embrace being a cog * Understand your "API"