Ask HN: What problems do you have?
It has to be a problem you have. It can be a personal problem or a business problem. It can be big or small. If you have tried finding solutions, explain whether it worked or if not, why not. If anyone else wrote a problem you experience too, elaborate in the thread.
A problem I have at the moment is finding clearly defined problems, like a directory of problems….
(
15 comments
| on HN
)
You prioritize evaluating "urgency - how pressing", "importance - how impactful", and "size - how consuming".
Some things are to be dealt with earlier independently of the importance, and other things are dealt with speedily so it is worth to have them done earlier to alleviate the queue.
There is a scalar resulting from the three dimensions, and that ranks your priorities.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_management#The_Eisenhower...
Eisenhower did not say it was his idea. See https://quoteinvestigator.com/2014/05/09/urgent/
> It is a great procedure
That is a classification procedure¹, not a ranking procedure. It does not satisfy the original poster's request.
¹(Acted upon immediately; scheduled for action; delegated; dropped.)
What I don't understand about your comment is the similarity to your scheme that just has the 'cost' dimention addionally. The 'cost' doesn't make the entities any more 'rankable' though. So why wouldn't I apply your critic to your own proposed system?
This comment is not in bad faith. I'm just a little confused about your point. If you have some sort of experience or qualification in this field, I'd be happy to be corrected.
With that process (the "Eisenhower") you distribute items into four classes; the classes are in a way ranked, but the items within each class are not sortable with that method.
(And the problem of the OP was having all items under the same scalar of importance. The decisor using the Eisenhower method will obtain a distribution in two sets - "act" and "schedule" - but will still be at a loss about what to tackle first.)
> The 'cost' does[...] make ... rankable
It does - it makes the "ToDo" set of collection of fully ranked items. Take a set of items, build a function of (urgency, importance, lightness), attribute a scalar to each of (u,i,l) and a scalar is returned which allows for fully sorting the set of items.
> If you have some sort of experience or qualification in this field
Yes :)
Top are things you must do or should for success. Bottom are things you don't have to do.
Left side is urgent. Right side is not.
#1 are things that need immediate attention, from literal fires in your kitchen, to losing your keys while you are outside of your locked house.
#2 are ongoing projects or tasks to which are being done for a ongoing goal. Something like building a guest house in your backyard for a visitor someday. Or a side project. Or planning for retirement.
#3 Addictions. It is good to understand for anyone with a few brain cells left that this one is not ideal. Other things here might be watching TV and so on. Not great place to be and I'm here a lot. It probably isn't good to be entertained on the ride to hell.
#4 Recreation, planning for vacation. Typically not as negative as quadrant 3. Remember that time is more important than anyone alive can really know fully. No one knows when we are told to put our pencils down in the test of life besides God. But while we are here we should enjoy friends and family and make time for others. Even volunteering would fit here well.
I didn't even read the book. But the story about it from my friend was useful recently.
http://encyclopedia.uia.org/en
Software can contribute to most if not all of the needed solutions.
Cheers!
It's not that I get declined, but I struggle sending out applications in the first place (because of reasons).