McKeown is, if nothing else, methodical. As he has walked us through Essentialism, he has taken us through:
- What Essentialism is (Essence)
- How we find our Essentials (Explore)
- How we make room for our Essentials (Eliminate)
Having done all of this, there remains one element: How do we ensure that we work on our Essentials every day?
McKeown goes back to his example of the overly full closet: Even after we have organized the closet and have done the initial sorting, closets are not static items. If we do not make an effort to maintain the organization by providing a methodology of things like regular sorting and donations and watching what we purchase, we will end up with the same issue:
"In other words, once you've figured out which activities and efforts to keep in your life, you have to have a system for executing them. You can't wait until that closet it bursting at the seams and then takes superhuman efforts to purge it. You need to have a system in place so that keeping it neat becomes routine and effortless."
Non-essentialists force execution, writes McKeown. Essentialists take the time they have saved by Eliminating the nonessentials and then invest it into designing a system to make execution a sustaining activity with minimal input from them.
We like to do easy things as humans. Execute is simply how Essentialists make things easy for themselves to do the Essential things.
---
The actual test of any system is not just "Does it work?", but "Does it work over time?"
You can see this in the success of Six Sigma/Lean projects. At one time I used to know the precise number, but well over half of those projects fail after 3-5 years. Why? Because the amount of time and effort to maintain them is too much for standard operations. The project champion moves on and no-one else sees the value in continuing the work. It just becomes "one more thing to do".
McKeown's closet metaphor works for me, if for no other reason than - having recently moved and had reorganize things - I see the practice of it daily. Even if I organized things in the house, things seem to keep showing up. If I do not keep on top of it, the apartment will begin to look like a hoarder's lair in short order.
It is not just enough to organize. Sustaining is where one realizes long term success.
The success of a system is truly what you ask - does it work over time? The initial enthusiasm for a thing can do much to get it going, but once the enthusiasm fades, is there enough commitment to stick with it? That's one shortcoming of the many youtube videos and web articles on projects and ideas. I often find myself wondering if it still works for them so many years later.
ReplyDeleteI find routine to be my best tool in making sure the essentials are accomplished. It took me awhile to understand that, but once in place, a good routine can be one's framework for the day. Seasonal and daily variances are put on a list, and fill in the time slots allotted for jobs like that. I rarely finish everything on the list, but I always have the sense that I did some purposeful things that day.
Leigh, I suspect that if success was measured by maintenance of a system over time (let alone an improvement), most things would be considered failures. In that sense long running blogs and web blogs - something which seem to be hard to come by - probably give a better picture than just a snapshot.
DeleteI had never thought about routine in that sense, but it sounds exactly right. I actually fall into that category myself, at least for mornings. Evenings have been more of a challenge, mostly because my "start time" at home varies so much.
You've made me think, TB... In terms of rooms that hold specific activities, our kitchen is the most organized room in the house, and it stays that way because we have routines in cooking, cleaning, putting away. Purging happens in the course of daily life - if a cabinet or drawer gets too full, somethings need to be donated, tossed or recycled. The sticky part is when I come upon things that I don't use often (or ever), but they hold some sort of appeal - visual or otherwise. I do a little check in my spirit before getting rid of the thing, and unfortunately, sometimes simply having the space to give the questionable thing means it stays - even if it doesn't add any value at all to our lives.
ReplyDeleteAll that said, if I treated all the other spaces in our home like I do the kitchen (and laundry room/pantry, now that I think about it), I'd more quickly tackle my overabundance of nonessential stuff.
Becki, that is a great model as well! Kitchens are a very viable model as well because - as you point out - there are things we use constantly or things that we use only occasionally, but when we need them, we need them.
DeleteLike you, I often have to a "reality" check - and apparently we share the struggle to get rid of things that may have some value other than functional.
Your last point - about treating all the other spaces the same as the kitchen - is part of what McKeown is getting at, I think. We need to put our whole life under the microscope of Essentialism to be the most benefit from it.
I have seen a lot of six sigma/lean failures over the years for the very reason you mentioned. It has to become second nature and part of the work place culture but that is really hard to accomplish.
ReplyDeleteIndeed, Ed. And it has to be sustainable almost from the beginning: creating additional superstructure or special practices or having "people that do that" will never endure.
Delete