So, I’m using a (slightly modified) Pomodoro system. I have a Beeminder goal to ensure
that I have at least 10 25-minute-long working periods every day, and
this has served me pretty well over the last 4+ years. I have things
set up so that if I’m doing something for X minutes and X≥25, my goal
gets a datapoint of ⌊x/25⌋ (so that if I’m doing something for 50
minutes without a break, it counts as two “tomatoes”). I don’t have a
fixed length of break between these 25-minute bursts, though.
But I’m more and more convinced that this is not the best idea. I
read about “Third time”; its author’s critique of Pomodoro resonates
with me very well. In fact, I implemented a very similar system which
measures my “efficiency” (i.e., the ratio of time spent working and
the total time), and makes sure it stays high. It’s similar to “third
time” with three exceptions:
I usually set it up so that my efficiency goal is 85% (or sometimes
80%, when I’m feeling a bit lazy), compared to Third Time’s 75%. I
start the clock when I sit down to work at my office, and “clock
out” when I’m done.
I can start an “official break” which does not count towards the
total time. (I have a complicated system where I get so-called
“productivity points”, also beeminded. One way to gain those is to
have either “85% efficiency achieved and at most 15 minutes of
these breaks”, and another - scored less - is “80% efficiency and
at most 25 minutes of breaks”.)
Unlike Third Time, I can rest for longer than my efficiency goal
dictates, but then I need to work harder later. IOW, I can
“borrow” time, but I have to “pay it back” on the same day.
I am wondering if ditching the “tomatoes” isn’t a good idea. The
problem with them is that I often take a “forced break” after 25
minutes and lose context and/or flow and/or motivation. (Much like
the author of this article.)
Still, I’d like to have a Beeminder goal which would be an incentive
to work for longer periods of time. Working for 45 minutes without
taking a break is better than working for 15 minutes, taking a break,
working for another 15 minutes, taking another break, and working for
15 minutes again. On the other hand, work bursts of 60 minutes and
more should be at least not encouraged, and possibly actively
discouraged as unhealthy.
Does anyone here have any idea for a metric which could help me with
this? A few final thoughts:
Goodhart’s law is not a problem for me – this would be one of quite
a few systems (at least three) I have in place to make sure I work
enough.
Workaholism is not a problem for me, so discouraging too long
periods of work is a nice-to-have, not really a requirement.
I can (and probably will) translate this metric into code so that it
will be beeminded automatically, but I’d still prefer a simpler one
over a more complicated one (for obvious reasons).
I’d prefer not to use systems other than Beeminder that store my
personal data “in the clown” – I try to avoid sharing my sensitive
data on the internet, and while Beeminder is one of the exceptions I
make, I’d prefer not to add too many other ones.
Hmm, intriguing questions. Not sure I have good answers. In the past I’ve found that seeking to force myself to reach a certain level of productivity using tools such as Beeminder has led to frustration and burnout. I find that from day to day and hour to hour I need different tools based on my energy levels, ability to focus, work to be done, etc. So trying to force myself into a single productivity structure tends to backfire.
But maybe you and your situation are different?
I’m curious. Do you use this mandatory efficiency metric every day for your whole working day? You mention focused work. Is this based on Cal Newport’s book Deep Work? That is, time spent focusing on difficult intellectual problems without distraction?
What type of work do you do? Is it all amenable to a deep focus strategy?
That’s why many of my goals are not very steep, and I make an effort to remind myself that it’s ok if I fail now and then.
As I explain below, it’s very far from a “single productivity structure”.
Yes, usually – but when I have a bad day, or something unexpected pops up, I drop it without regret. If that started to happen more often than, say, once a week, I’d probably be worried.
As I said, this is only a third layer of a pretty complex system. The first layer is a simple Beeminder goal “work for at least X minutes every day”. The second layer (which helps achieve that goal) is a pretty complicated “productivity score”, an earlier version of which was described here. This second layer is tied to another Beeminder goal, with a very conservative rate. (More often than not I could sit and do nothing for 2 days and not yet derail.) This is the third layer which is supposed to help me achieve the goal of the second layer.
Not really – I’ve heard about it, but not read it.
Programming/software development (that is, programming+writing docs+design etc.)
Just to add some notes from the beemails and the Discord to this thread about Third Time:
Theo called it calorie counting for time management. My understanding of the idea is that maybe there’s a fixed fraction of your workday – say 75% as with hourly tocks – that you realistically can stay focused. If so, you can use an adaptive algorithm to hit that fraction like so:
Start a timer and start working
Whenever you get distracted or otherwise want a break, stop the timer
Start a countdown timer for your break set to 1/3 as much time as however long you worked
Start working again when that timer goes off
(Or if you want to start working earlier, save your unused break time to add to your next break)
Rinse, repeat, finish the day having spent 3/4 of your time focused and the other 1/4 on breaks
Part of the appeal is that it’s more flexible than pomodoros (aka tocking). If you’re on a roll you shouldn’t stop working. And vice versa: don’t force it if you can’t stay focused. Maybe it also helps with activation energy? When you start your work day you’re not committing to any fixed amount of time for the first time block.
This also reminds me of Nick Winter’s percentile feedback system for productivity:
And I now think that the Platonic version of Third Time is a second-by-second Beeminder-like graph with wall-clock time (technically work time + break time, there might also be time that’s neither) on the x-axis and work time on the y-axis. Your focus fraction target is the slope of the bright red line – something less than 100% ie a 45-degree line on the graph.
You start out the day working and you’re climbing along at 45 degrees, above the red line. As soon as you start a break, you start flatlining. The moment when you collide with the red line is the moment your break time is up and you have to start working again.
(That’s all entirely equivalent to the existing Third Time algorithm. See also the bright red staircase.)
Thanks – though that still does not answer my initial problem… I guess I’ll have to come up with something myself and see how it goes. (I’ll try to remember to report back here.)
