The two minutes rule is an excellent productive
habit without a doubt. But there are circumstances in which follow it
to rigorously complicates the progress on the most important activities.
Especially on those that require more time and concentration.
I have to admit that the application of the rule of two minutes to my
list of habits has provoked a huge transformation in my productivity. A long
list of activities that were occupying my head when they were left as pending were
easily closed with a little time spent executing them. This action freed my
mind of concerns, allowing to me to maintain a greater ability to do in day by
day basis
Before reading Getting ThingsDone by David Allen, I had built intuitively the notion that if something
could be resolved quickly was better to settle it soon. Doing so it wasn´t
still occupying my mind in its realization.
However, the overuse of this rule can lead to a loss of our ability to
devote the right time to the important issues. And I mean both: in quantity and
in quality time.
The first example that I would like to discuss is the interruptions, of
course of "two minutes".
When you are doing something important, though a task can be done in two
minutes, it is preferable to sometimes leave it for a more appropriate time
rather than interrupt an activity that requires concentration and intense
dedication to be completed.
It is true that if we can solve the interruption fast, many times it´s not
worth planting a non to whom is stopping us. But no less certain is that one of
our main responsibilities is always to decide how we apply our time. And if
that time is dedicated to addressing recurrent interruptions of short duration
and by the mere habit of avoiding saying “NO”, it is not very likely that we
are not applying enough time to the most relevant activities and that requires
more dedication on our part. There is where should enter in the game our
abilities to prioritize and make decisions; then negotiate.
Another interesting to consider case is when one takes as usual get the
activities of two minutes first, because once completed only remaining things
which require more time and possibly more important. If the list of tasks that can be completed in
two minutes is relatively short, this method can be valid and “Yes”, it has the
advantage that clears the mind of concerns about pending tasks that disappear
from the scene with very little effort.
But... If this same list is long enough, one may end up occupying a
large portion of useful time of the day to resolve things that maybe are not as
important, relegating precious time and sometimes of the better quality that
could be dedicated to our most valuable interests. Ultimately, in this case
what one ends up exposing is a poor prioritization of tasks.
I do not put in this discussion the case of those tasks of 'alleged two
minutes' that suddenly become "thieves of time" and destroy us any
pre-planning. Here you can have from a calculation error, which is resolved
with the experience, to situations of full force majeure that simply must be
tackled and that all what you need is sufficient flexibility in order to avoid producing a setback in our
organization system.
Managing our time is more an art than a science. There are useful rules,
but as in all cases, we must never lose sight our priorities. From my point of
view, unless removing a “two minutes task” of my list ensures that you I will
have more time for a more important task, you should always begin to perform
those which are of greatest relevance in terms of its consequences.
Related Links
