Unfortunately I think the answer is far simpler, but the implications create a far more difficult problem to solve.

We are emotional creatures that have developed a consciousness through evolution. This means that our emotional filtering and weighting of all stimuli tends to lead our response before we apply rational thinking. Our conscious brains appear to work on an automatic pattern basis, endeavouring to recognise a stimulus eg. a red stop light, and respond according to the pattern programme i.e. we stop without really thinking about it.

We procrastinate and end up with ever-growing to do lists containing the important stuff because of how we have emotionally weighted the items on the list; and probably even because of the existence of the list itself.

In simple terms I think we don’t get things done that we feel resistant to. Obviously we feel resistant to either hard or unpleasant things – like a tax return. But also to things that we do not have a pattern for; the things that are new or strange like writing a report or starting a new project at work. We take on, or are given, tasks without knowing how to do them. Equally, we just take on too much and feel resistant to the sheer volume.

This emotional resistance only becomes counter-balanced when we hit a deadline where we have to do the task. Invariably we then do it – and marvel at how easy it was.

So the problem with the information overloaded, hyper-connected world is that it throws us more things that we want to do, read, buy, explore etc. These all go onto the mental or physical to do list and fuel our resistance to the list.

The activities that are labelled as our diversion or avoidance tactics – emails, social networking or doing the things we know how to do – are, I think, our attempts to get something done so that we can get the pay-off of completion rather than procrastination.

So, what to do?

Again, the logical answer is simple, but there’s a ‘gotcha’ after the list:

1. Break the tasks down into smaller ‘do-able’ sub-tasks and start with a small ‘baby-step’. Repeat the baby-steps until the task is done
2. Trick yourself into acting: tell yourself you’re just going to fill in the bits of the tax return you can; you’ll just put together the headings of the report. You won’t. As soon as you’ve started the resistance dissolves and you’ll get on with it
3. Don’t accept items. Be realistic with how much time you have and don’t overload your task list with things that will never get done. If you’re being asked to do something that you can’t do, don’t be a martyr: say ‘no’ (nicely)
4. Pretend you were getting someone else to do the task. Write out a list of instructions for them of how to go about it. Then do it yourself instead
5. Set yourself a time limit: do as much of the task as you can in fifteen minutes. Even though it’s rarely you’ll get it done, under pressure you’ll have worked through what needs to be done and feel less resistant to it
6. Talk through your task list with someone, anyone. Tell them you have to prioritise and see what their view is. Invariably they won’t understand, but in arguing why they’re wrong you’ll achieve the right prioritisation
7. Time block slots to complete the tasks and ‘fire wall’ all the tasks that hit you today to be processed and time slots blocked out tomorrow

So you look through these and think you have the answer. Well, you do and you don’t. Because we’re emotional creatures that have developed a consciousness through evolution you’ll probably end up successfully trying a technique above. It may work a few times, but then you’ll start to slip back into your old ways again because even the act of doing something in such a structured way over time feels like a threat. The emotional resistance comes back and sabotages our best endeavours.

A reason to be depressed? A continuation of the mild, but persistent headache of not getting things done? Well, it would be if the above weren’t also a trick: tell yourself it’s not going to work and you might just find yourself accidentally forming a productive habit. Simple.

I suspect there is a greater depth to the relationship than the obvious connections:

1. The control and structuring of all tasks and ‘to-do’s', as well as the ordering of thoughts and the use of systems and processes creates free space for creative thinking
2. This free space for creative thinking can be conscious: as in consciously planned time and space for creative thinking. It can also be unconscious: as in the freeing up of mental space to allow thoughts to percolate in the background
3. The creation of structure or parameters around the object or subject of the creativity focuses the thinking and creativity. Does it enable fewer variables to disrupt the thinking around the possible options? To concentrate the power in the focus? (is this the opposite of 1. above?)
4. Does structure reduce the sense of panic? Quell the reactive brain by avoiding the stress of ‘having to be creative’. Removing the pressure of blue sky thinking. Creating the shallow ‘on-ramp’.
5. Something about answering questions. When framed or structured, do we have something deeper/ more genetic pre-disposed to answer problems
6. Creates a kind of brain ‘anchor’. Avoids the natural tendency to bounce around from thought to thought, and makes it keep on coming back to the framed and structured challenge

I know a man who uses a flamenco dancing analogy when it comes to using constraints to achieve creativity: where strong control over the dancer’s movements portray the deepest passion and emotions (I added the last bit after a bit of ‘flamenco research’ Dan…)

The power of the human imagination is still relatively little researched. Productivity literature, parents and teachers ask us to focus on the task in hand and our project plans. Yet we know through our human history that it has been the big thinkers that have enabled our faster progress as a human race: not those who just focus on the here & now and accept the norm.

As animals, we are goal oriented (food, sex….) and from what we know about our evolution, we can speculate that a sophistication in our goal setting was introduced as we developed consciousness. We could defer satisfaction. Invest time and energy, working together for a longer-term and ultimately more rewarding goal. I suspect this skill is also subject to further evolution. We can be bound by what we know, as framed by our human history and what we tell each other. Limited by the current ‘realities’ of our knowledge. Or we can recognise this will just bring us a tomorrow that looked like yesterday.

Instead, we need to recognise our own power of imagination. We use the same parts of our brain in imagining as we do in remembering. Your ‘brain’ doesn’t really know that your big vision hasn’t already happened; therefore you are the only blocker to your dreams. Your limiting self-beliefs, your why-nots. So let’s take advantage of our sophistication. Let’s blow the doors off everything that limits us. Let’s all start to have visions that we’re proud of: our reality is what we make it.

Fortunately a giant robot dinosaur called FAKEGRIMLOCK comes to the rescue of our human limitations on a post on Eric Ries’ Lean Startup blog. My favourite part:

EVERYONE GOOD AT SEE CAN’T. EVERYONE LIVE IN WORLD FULL OF IMPOSSIBLE.

EVERYTHING THAT MATTER IMPOSSIBLE UNTIL SOMEONE DO IT ANYWAY.

STOP BEING EVERYONE. STARE AT WHY NOT UNTIL IT GIVE UP AND BECOME HOW TO.

1. Relentless pursuit of bold ideas – protect the organisational resources required to deliver them.
2. Customer surprise & delight – this should drive the product/service roadmap.
3. Ego can be acceptable if it makes the organisation more successful.
4. It’s about results, not activity.
5. The 3 Rs – strong leaders ensure right people/ right jobs/ right conditions enabled for success.
6. Tell the truth – call out poor ideas and poor performance
7. Inspirational communication – frequent and intensely motivational communication about compelling objectives

More details and pitfalls here:  The Real Lessons from Steve Jobs’ Career | ChiefExecutive.net | Chief Executive Magazine.

Two completely different jobs made me think over the last month or so about focus and immediate action.

We’re in the middle of having windows fitted. In the middle of what I’ve calculated to be 88 man hours of work to replace 100yr old windows and frames with exact replicas in a 4-bed house. Now I think that’s quite impressive anyway. I could talk about expertise and professionalism. The skills built up over the years by the tradesmen in the company that we’re using. However, it’s their immediacy of action that is down-right staggering.

Day One. Minute six of them being in the house. One old window out. Two men literally walked in, accepted our offer of cups of tea, rolled out a dust sheet as they walked in and up the stairs and into the bed room and then quickly covered the closest furniture to the windows. Drills and crowbars out. Window out. Six minutes.

And this pace of immediate action has been maintained over the last 48 hours. They’re in at nine. An hour for lunch. Away at four. What’s massively noticeable compared to other tradesmen we’ve used is that everything is action focused. They only seem to take breaks by drinking the copius quantities of tea we provide them at the same time as swiftly discussing their next immediate action. Brian Tracy would be well proud. Fully frogged-up.

Then when I was running early one morning, piercing blue sky, and the white streak of a fighter jet streaking across the horizon. My thoughts about that fighter pilot’s role hit me all at once. Total focus. Absolutely no distraction. Allow in the distraction = Death. No ‘quick check of the email’ during the middle of writing that Board paper. No thinking about what to watch on telly that night. Pretty sure they’re not allowing the pressure of admin into their focus on the important activity of keeping a c.$138 million bit of metal from crashing and losing your life at the same time.

So, must remember when working: focus like a fighter pilot and work like a window-fitter…….

From Execution

1. Look for disruptive change. As you are about to start a new venture, ask yourself these questions: What is becoming possible or necessary that wasn’t possible before?  Is a new product or service able to take over an existing market or create a new market? When I co-founded LinkedIn in 2003, the tech industry was in a deep depression. I looked at all the opportunities created by the Internet and had the idea that eventually everyone would need a professional profile online. This profile would enable them to connect with similar professionals and share news, tips and other information. The development of online professional profiles that people could create and control themselves led to an enormous, disruptive change in the recruiting industry. It provided a way for people to directly reach the best candidates rather than hoping for responses from a listing in the paper.

2. Aim big. Regardless of whether a start-up is targeting a big idea or small one, it will still require the same amount of blood, sweat and tears — so aim big! What is big? It is a new product or service that creates or dominates a significant market. If the market is small or your product is only a marginal improvement over what is already available, you will be taking the same risks but for a much smaller potential gain. I am on the board of a company called Shopkick, which aims to revolutionize retail shopping through a mobile application and incentive program that will enable retailers to attract new and more frequent shoppers. Shopkick founder Cyriac Roeding didn’t think small. He is targeting ALL retail shopping.

3. Build a network to magnify your company. A lot of people seem to think that behind every great start-up is a single entrepreneur with an idea. The reality is, great companies are built by a number of people with talent who are surrounded by supportive networks. Going beyond recruiting exceptional talent, the most successful entrepreneurs bring in advisers, investors and even early customer relationships. Building out this network of alliances massively increases the size and probability of a positive result. Zynga, a global social-gaming company based in San Francisco and founded four years ago, has raised a great deal of capital yet the company’s founder and CEO, Mark Pincus, has yet to use most of it. He raised that money in order to bring in strong board members who could help him build his gaming empire. The capital those investors bring to the table is just insurance.

4. Plan for good and bad luck. Whenever you are about to embark on building a new company you should assume two things: You will have good luck and you will have bad luck. Good luck is not as simple as “it works out.” Rather, good luck is when you suddenly discover a great opportunity and can quickly shift to go after it. Bad luck is what happens when your idea doesn’t work out. It doesn’t mean instant failure, but means you need to go to plan B. PayPal was founded at the turn of this past decade. When we launched the first product, the company still thought of itself as a mobile payments company. We came upon some good luck when we noticed the massive traction and growth from just one week of providing payments for eBay’s marketplace. The company quickly pivoted so that its main focus was powering eBay’s marketplace.

5. Maintain flexible persistence. Very often entrepreneurs are given conflicting advice. They are told, “Be persistent! Stick to your vision! Drive through adversity!” At the same time they are told, “Listen to customer feedback! Pivot on key data! Know when to change!” The challenge for entrepreneurs is to be able to follow both pieces of advice at the same time. In other words, you must know when to maintain flexible persistence. Over the years PayPal has made multiple significant pivots. The company started as a mobile encryption platform. Then it was a mobile payments company. Next PayPal was a combination mobile and Web site payments company. Finally PayPal became an email payments company. Each pivot over the life of the company was the result of rethinking the business but maintaining the vision. The focus was always to become a payments operating system; but the nature of the operating system changed multiple times.

Reid Hoffman is co-founder and chairman at LinkedIn and a Pprtner at Greylock Partners. He is a member of the founding team at PayPal and has been an angel investor and adviser to dozens of organizations including Facebook, Zynga, Flickr and Last.FM.  He currently serves on the boards of LinkedIn, Zynga, Shopkick, Kiva.org and Mozilla. His complete profile can be found at www.linkedin.com/in/reidhoffman.

via LinkedIn’s Reid Hoffman: Five Lessons for Entrepreneurs – Tech Europe – WSJ.

1. The cost of understanding your product/service has to be less than the immediately obvious benefit that comes from using your product/ service.People will stay with you (pitch/ marketing message/ website) for as long as their needs being solved are made immediately apparent, are sufficiently significant, and the ways in which your product/ service solves that need are clearly understandable (and the cost of understanding is less than the benefit) [adapted and evolved from SuperConnect]
2. A CEO should be aiming to only focus on strategy and people development: your head should be 12-18mths hence at first (longer over time), and your heart should be in developing the person better than you.You are the only person in the business whose job it really is to ‘develop the insights/ perceptions/ abilities to detect patterns of change and relate them to your landscape, industries, competition and business’ [adapted from Execution]. You should always be looking to develop the person better than you to be able to take your job. If they don’t yet exist in your company, make sure you hire them. ‘Yes’ or ‘passive no’ people will kill your business.
3. If the core transactions of your business don’t exist without funding (including your time/cost funding), then your sole focus should be on adjusting your business model to be profitable in its core operation without investment.However well-funded or visionary your plans are, the cash flow monster eats the investment and then chases and kills 99% of its prey.
4. If you can’t translate what you do into an emotional need solved, your business idea will struggle. I always get my businesses and clients to then translate this further into the company’s mission: its reason for existing. This aligns the owners, team, stakeholders and clients behind a common mission.Compelling needs are fine. Emotional needs take your business to another level. Just make sure you go back to the ‘patterns of change’ point in 2. above, because as soon as a need is solved another tends to appear.
5. The primary reason for failure (after cash) is a lack of self-awareness. A lack of honesty where the founder/ owner/ MD is doing things which they shouldn’t and others should. An inability to analyse their own blockers and get out-of-the-way of their own business’ success. Only focus on what you and only you can do. Delegate or outsource all else.This is the reason all my current businesses (Scarlet Monday, MyNeuroCoach.com, MyOwnChairman.com) exist to enable entrepreneurs, CEOs and MDs to fulfil their ambitions for their business by removing their own blockers to success.

[Steve Jobs - Stanford commencement speech, June 2005]

via Steve Jobs Quotes.

There is no magical “secret” to this effect, and no, you cannot change the world simply by wishful thinking. But your attitude and beliefs about yourself affect how you behave, and sometimes attitudes become self-fulfilling. The general principle seems to be – that it is better to be optimistic than pessimistic.

A new study is in line with this principle.  Researchers in this case focused on attitudes regarding the ability to learn from one’s mistakes. They gave subjects a simple test – identifying the letter in the middle of a five-letter sequence. This is an easy task, but when done over and over eventually people make mistakes. The research focused on how they react when such mistakes occur. Some individuals seemed to learn from their mistakes, increase their effort, and improve later performance. Others did not recover from the mistake and improve their later performance.

These behaviors correlated with the subjects’ attitudes. Those who felt they could learn from their mistakes, did. Those who felt that intelligence and performance are fixed characteristics did not improved their performance after the error. Again – these attitudes appear to be self-fulfilling.

via NeuroLogica Blog » Learn from Your Mistakes – Or Don’t.