3 Reasons WHY You Are Not Productive
A few days ago, we covered the WHAT’s of lack of productivity: http://andrewparkes.me/2009/06/11/not-getting-things-done-the-4-main-whats/
At the core, the WHAT is about finding less meaningful, time sucking tasks that make us feel good but drain away valuable time for harder, more impactful activities.
Now, the more important question:
WHY would anyone let a productivity draining behaviour (such as checking e-mail 50 times per day) prevent them from having the time to:
- accomplish high value tasks at their job.
- exercise every single day.
- read a book per week.
- spend actual quality time with friends.
- solve world hunger (or any other wildly worthwhile global cause.)
If a low value activity (like incessant e-mail checking) is sucking up the time you could be devoting to more impactful activities like these, something needs to change.
Let’s look at the top 3 reasons WHY you may be behaving this way:
1. Insecurity Around Preserving Your Precious ’Bizmage’ - (New word I just made up: BIZ (BUSY) + IMAGE = Bizmage)
‘I have to check my e-mail as soon as it is delivered. What if I miss something really important?’
Reality: Being someone who gets majorly hard tasks done in a compressed time frame will make you the MAN at your office. This is the image you want… you will stand out and move up rapidly. As well, it will more than make up for any risk in missing something trivial because you haven’t checked your e-mail in the last 15 mintues.
More importantly, I would question the productivity level of anyone that looks down on me because I am not ready to fully debrief the e-mail they sent me 87 seconds ago. Maybe this person should also read this post as well?
2. General Avoidance of Activities Perceived as ‘Hard’
‘I will just take a quick look at my E-Mail In-Box before starting ________.’ (very important activity)
Reality: The ONLY way you will advance in your career, become successful, and gain respect and admiration from your boss is by doing the HARD things. Answering e-mail 50 times per day is actually a lot easier and will only make you appear busy… not effective. Recognize this for what it is… an excuse centred on avoidance of the things you KNOW you need to get done. Does this excuse show up in other parts of your life?
As well, it is virtually impossible for anyone to just ‘briefly’ look at an e-mail in-box without wanting to answer, forward, or take action. It’s like asking a fat person at an all-you-can-eat restaurant to order off the menu. Not happening!
3. Incorrect Assumptions About Others’ Expectations
‘I need to respond to this e-mail right away or I will be in trouble, lose my client’s respect, etc.’
Reality: Your perception of people’s reactions is 100% wrong:
- First, despite the urgent tone, most peope are not expecting a response in 15 minutes. In fact, the person sending the e-mail is actually the absolute worst person to assess urgency level. Why? Because EVERYTHING is urgent from their point-of-view. It’s usually not.
- Second, most people are simply E-Mail Jockeys. They are trying to do as little as possible to move the message around while adding as little value to it as possible. The worst thing you can do is get back to them quickly with another e-mail or the information they were looking for in the first place. Why? Because an E-Mail Jockey is trying to avoid meaningful, high value work in order to appear busy… that’s why they are sending you an urgent e-mail in the first place!
- Third, people that respond to an e-mail within a few minutes actually make me feel weird… like they have been sitting around doing nothing for the last 147 minutes. I know I am a pretty cool dude and all but is there anything else happening in their neck of the woods or am I it??!!
The bottom line here is that I am asking you to take a real hard look at WHY you do things the you do. Are your WHY’S really legitimate? Or are they truly just an excuse/smoke screen to preserve a certain image but move you no closer to achieving the big, hairy, audacious goals that you are too busy to move closer to?

