Against Project-Smoothing, In Praise of Mission Creep
When you have a project to accomplish, it seems commonsensical to smooth it out into medium-sized chunks at regular intervals -- an hour today, an hour tomorrow, etc. Obvious and SO VERY WRONG. The problem is that this neglects the transition costs associated with a switch from one state to another, which are more considerable than you typically think they are when you're just imagining it. Mental inertia is real and you ignore it at your peril. Ditto for the fact that inspiration is a fickle mistress.
Doing nearly the opposite is better: chunk your work into either A) long marathons when you find yourself fired up enough about something to sustain enthusiasm for many hours straight, or B) such absurdly small actions that it doesn't even feel like a transition, like writing one sentence or five lines of code. Sometimes you'll even get lucky and what you intend as a quick in-and-out (B) mission will unexpectedly transform into a full blown Vietnam-scale (A) engagement. This sort of wedge strategy is exactly what the Internet uses against you to steal productivity, but you can turn it around and make it work in your favor. Mission creep can be a good thing after all!
Doing nearly the opposite is better: chunk your work into either A) long marathons when you find yourself fired up enough about something to sustain enthusiasm for many hours straight, or B) such absurdly small actions that it doesn't even feel like a transition, like writing one sentence or five lines of code. Sometimes you'll even get lucky and what you intend as a quick in-and-out (B) mission will unexpectedly transform into a full blown Vietnam-scale (A) engagement. This sort of wedge strategy is exactly what the Internet uses against you to steal productivity, but you can turn it around and make it work in your favor. Mission creep can be a good thing after all!