So today I want to talk about an idea from my most recent book, Slow Productivity. This is an idea that proved controversial. I'm going to argue that a lot of the negative reaction to this idea captures something crucially wrong about the way we think about knowledge work in our current digital moment.

I will then use these insights to offer advice for how we might correct this wrong and how you might yourself find a little less burnout in your own professional existence. All right, so what is the piece of advice that we're going to base this deep dive on? I'm going to bring up an article on the screen here for those who are watching.

This was from my book, Slow Productivity, but I wrote about it in multiple venues after the book came out, including the New York Times. Here is an article about it that was published at CNBC. Let me read you the headline of this article. Want to boost your productivity? Hit the movies during work, expert says.

A spoiler alert, that expert is me. Let me read the opening to the article here. Want to get more done? Try stepping back, way back, and maybe out to the movie theater during the workday. At least that's one productivity tip from Cal Newport, a Georgetown University professor and author of Slow Productivity.

Okay, so I offered this advice. I lived this advice. In fact, and this is true, earlier the week that we are recording this, I did exactly this advice, more or less. I didn't go to a movie theater, but I did watch a movie during the day. Here was the setup, just to contextualize this advice.

I had some deadlines I was working on. Two separate articles that were kind of both trying to get moved on to production, and I've been working really hard on this during my writing hours. I write for the first half of most days, and I had to work on Sunday on this, because deadlines are coming up.

Really worked hard on it. Monday, really worked hard on it. Tuesday, got everything in Tuesday. Wednesday morning, did like the final tweaks, and I said to myself, you know what I'm going to do? I'm not, as my plan for the week says, now move on to returning to my book today and writing.

I'm going to watch a movie instead, and I did. I got that locked in, and I watched, and I am not embarrassed to admit it, because I put this off for a long time. The 2016, I believe, M. Night Shyamalan movie split. The second movie in his post-After Earth comeback, a comeback that began with 2015's The Visit.

I was interested. I was on a Shyamalan kick. I forgot why. I was reading about him for something. I forget why. And then I went back and was like, what did I miss from Shyamalan during this period in which I was having young kids? And so I went back and I watched it with James McAvoy, and it was fantastic, and I really enjoyed it and have a lot of thoughts about it, but it was great.

And then today, so we're recording this on Thursday, back to my book writing. So I went and watched the movie. I took a break during the middle of the day, because I had judged I need to take my foot temporarily off the gas pedal here. I need to regroup and recharge, and I was able to come back with more energy today.

So that's like what I'm talking about when I say see a movie during the day, and I really detailed this with more gory details in my book Solar Productivity. All right, so there was pushback to this idea. I'm going to paraphrase here a common piece of pushback. If you work for a company, you are agreeing to give them eight hours of your labor per day.

If you step out for two hours, you're essentially stealing. All right, so this was sort of the nature of the pushback I was getting on this idea. I couldn't imagine if one of my employees was gone for two hours, they would fire that employee, a lot of that sort of pushback.

I think this is an important pushback, because if we look deeper at what is the source of this objection, what we are going to find is two different models for thinking about work. The first model that's implicitly at play here is what I call cranking. I'm taking this from the phrase cranking widgets, and it describes the industrial-era practice of using humans as part of a complex production machinery.

So starting with mills and then with factories as the Industrial Revolution picked up steam, you would build these production processes to whatever it is you were doing, milling, cotton, producing cars. And for the parts of this process that you couldn't really build a mechanical way of doing it, you would stick a human in there.

So we have a semi-automated loom, but we still need a human to move whatever the thing is that runs across the loom. They have to move that manually. There's a lot of parts of building the car that kind of happen automatically, but we still need someone to turn the bolt that connects the steering wheel, because you kind of have to get in there and do that.

Look, when it comes to cranking, the owners of these factories or mills would prefer to replace the people with machinery if they could. They're just using the people where they just don't have machinery to do it. And then over time, as machinery has gotten better, we've needed less and less people in these procedures.

From the cranking perspective, the critiques of seeing a movie occasionally during the workday makes a lot of sense. When you see employees as crankers, them being there is critical to what you're doing. If the guy who attaches the steering wheel to the Model Ts leaves the factory during the day to go watch a Charlie Chaplin movie, that's a really big problem, because all the Model Ts are going to come off the line without steering wheels, and the whole assembly line is going to have to stop while we wait for that guy to get back.

So from a cranking mindset, yes, you can't. Taking breaks during the workday is a problem. There's another way to think about work, though, and this has been around for a long time as well, and it's what I call creating. So we're going from cranking to creating. Creating means that you are autonomously applying skill and decision-making over time to create something valuable.

There's even a more formal definition that says, you know, add value to materials. You take in some material and you do something to it, and in the end you have something more valuable, whether it is you're carving something out of wood or producing written information that has become more valuable because you've applied your brain to it.

This could be an individual, not necessarily a solo act. Creating can also be a group of people working together to create something as well. So at Ford's factories, you were cranking on assembly lines, but at the Oldsmobile Benz, the original Benz car factory, it wasn't a factory. It was a group of craftsmen that would just sit around and produce a car from scratch, and they were doing more creating than they were cranking.

So here's a key point. When you're looking at creating, it's not a big deal that you have your foot going off and on the gas pedal, right? I know a fine woodworker, for example. His name is Gary. I wrote about him in Digital Minimalism. It takes him a couple weeks to finish a commission.

Builds really beautiful stuff out of wood. If on Thursday from 10 to 12.30 he watches Split, it doesn't matter, right? It doesn't matter. What matters is over this multi-week period, he's able to have enough concentrated, skilled work that he produces the table. It doesn't really matter exactly when those hours happen or that they're contiguous.

It's like, are you producing good tables in a reasonable amount of time? So for creators, this advice of seeing the movie in the afternoon is not a problem. All right. So here's what's happened in our economy writ large. The Industrial Revolution came along and turned more and more jobs into cranking jobs.

We had a huge amount of cranking jobs. It used to be you had farmers and artisan crafts people, and then the Industrial Revolution came along, and more and more of work was actually cranking. You were working as a human gear in a complicated production process. Then the knowledge economy became big in the 20th century, right?

So we coined the term "knowledge work" in the 1950s, and by the time we get to the turn of the millennium, this is something like 50% or more of the U.S. economy is coming out of knowledge work. And in knowledge work, where you have a lot of sort of well-educated white-collar workers, more and more of what they're doing is much closer to creating, right?

Whether you're creating computer code or marketing campaigns or lectures for the classroom, or diagnoses as a doctor or white paper reports on an industrial sector, it is creating more than it is cranking. There is no well-defined production process that you're a part of. So these are the people I'm really writing for in slow productivity, is the sort of knowledge workers who are creating.

And this is who I'm offering this advice about seeing the movie as a larger metaphor for being able to titrate up and down the intensity of your work and make sure that things are sustainable over time, that you're not just going all out all the time every day, and that for this type of complicated work, you need a little bit more give and pull.

Hey, it's Cal. I wanted to interrupt briefly to say that if you're enjoying this video, then you need to check out my new book, Slow Productivity, The Lost Art of Accomplishment Without Burnout. This is like the Bible for most of the ideas we talk about here in these videos.

I have a free excerpt at calnewport.com/slow. I know you're going to like it. Check it out. Now let's get back to the video. So once we understand these two groups and who I'm writing for, now we can see the problem that's facing our knowledge economy today. The people who are complaining about my advice are a symptom of this underlying problem that in the knowledge economy, we're treating creators as crankers.

And I get into this in my book, Slow Productivity, how did this come to happen? It's because it's hard to manage people in knowledge work. Pre-industrial creating was autonomous. It was you're an individual. You know, Shakespeare's dad made gloves. It was just him, right? And he had a shop above.

They lived above a shop, and he made gloves. Knowledge work now, you have a thousand people working in the same office, and we have managers above them, and then we have to connect what they're doing to initiatives and resources. And so we have to manage a bunch of creators now, and it was complicated to do.

It's much easier to manage cranking, so we decided we would treat creators like crankers. This gave rise to what I call in the book pseudo productivity, which is the idea of using visible activity as your proxy for useful effort. From this mindset, to see someone not giving effort or to take a break from giving effort is a problem.

It's the steering wheel guy going out to see the Charlie Chaplin movie. This is a problem, however, at a larger scale because it's a mismatch. We are managing creators as if they're crankers. This makes the managers' jobs easier, but it makes the creators miserable. Creating is best served by a mixture of autonomy with accountability.

I know what I'm going to do, see what I did and see if it's good, but also leave me alone to get it done. That's how creating happens best. And as I get into with example after example and slow productivity, one of the things this requires is, again, the careful titration of energy, that you're really focused on something and then you have to pull back a little bit to recharge or try to figure out a new angle of attack, and then you put the energy back up again.

The effort over time is a sort of jagged, unpredictable graph. It's not just a clear step function. I'm working, it's up, I'm done working, and it's down. When we treat people who are trying to do this creating as crankers, I want to see you work at all times. In fact, I'm going to throw a lot more kind of cranky, friendly stuff at you while you're trying to create emails to answers and meetings to attend.

It's exhausting. You're taking something that is supposed to be more up and down and variable and say just work all out all the time, and it exhausts people and it burns people out. So what I'm arguing here is that we need more clarity in the knowledge economy. When you're dealing with creators, that is people that you want to apply skill to create valuable things, treat them like creators.

Give them autonomy, give them freedom. Do this without excessive surveillance or interruption. And on the other end, hold them accountable. So we're going to let you go and build the stuff we want you to build us. Now, if the stuff is not good, then we have a problem. If you can't show me the value you're creating, then I might have to show you to a different role or to a different job.

But I'm not going to look over your shoulder like the supervisor at the Ford plant. I'm not going to get upset if I can't see visible activity at all times. I'm not going to demand that you do a hundred other things as well. When you have a pseudo productivity mindset, I don't care if I'm bombarding you with emails and meetings.

You're going to be here for eight hours doing effort, you know, putting those proverbial steering wheels on at a really fast pace. So who cares how much stuff I throw at you? You're going to be here doing stuff anyways. But when I have a creator mindset, it's like, no, no, that's getting in the way.

Don't go bother Gary the woodworker with a bunch of administrative questions. He's trying to build a table. So that's what I think we need to do. And if you want people to be crankers, be clear that's what you want them to do. And don't expect them to also be creators.

Make it clear this is what the role is. Give them the right support for it. Let's put the right controls around it. But when we kind of mix these two things together, we take largely creator jobs, but we manage them as if they're cranking jobs. That is one of the key sources of exhaustion and burnout and frustration that we see in the modern knowledge economy.

So in the reactions to the simple piece of advice, every once in a while I'll go see a movie during the day. In the reactions to that simple piece of advice, we see a complicated problem. And it's a problem that we can only solve by being clear about what it is we're actually trying to do and evolve the way we actually manage people to reflect what's actually going to work.

There we go, Jesse. You got to see a movie. Yeah. You see "Split"? No, I haven't. Yeah, it's interesting. So Shyamalan was put in movie jail because he had two flops in a row. And to get out of movie jail-- So he did "The Last Airbender" and "After Earth," Will Smith's sort of ill-conceived "Avatar" competitor.

To get out of movie jail, he borrowed $5 million-- Really? --by mortgaging his house and said, "I'm just going to do this low-budget comedy thriller. I'm going to film it myself." He filmed it himself, his own $5 million, and then went to find someone to distribute it. And no one--they're like, "No, you're in movie jail." No one's going to distribute this thing.

But then finally, Jason Blum from Blumhouse saw it and was like--they did "Paranormal Activity." They're the kings of a $5 million movie that makes $100 million is a very profitable thing. And they're like, "All right, we'll distribute it." And it was very successful. It made like $100 million, but they spent nothing on it, so that was like all profit.

And then the second movie of his comeback was "Split." Okay. Which it's--but also $9 million. He filmed it on the cheap, made like $257 million. It's a cool movie. I don't want to say too much about it. I really like it. There's a third movie now I have to see.

So if you've seen that movie, you know what I'm talking about, but I'm not going to spoil it for people. But the point is, it was really fun--just to be able to spend a couple hours, like, reading reviews of this and watching this movie in the middle of the morning on a Wednesday made such a huge psychological difference for me.

Oh, so you read a lot of the reviews, too. Oh, yeah, yeah. I read a lot about the movies I watch. Sometimes I watch and read about it. Sometimes I read--like, I'll take breaks and read and then keep watching some more. Yeah, I love doing that simultaneously. Interesting. Yeah.

I thought about some of them. Anyways, we've got some good questions to get to, but first, let's hear from one of our sponsors. I want to talk first about-- man, it's one of my favorite sponsors-- Cozy Earth. You've heard me talk about them on the show before. My wife and I are crazy about Cozy Earth.

Cozy Earth is all about helping you turn your home into a personal sanctuary, a place where you can escape the hustle and bustle of daily life. They understand the importance of finding comfort and peace amidst the chaos. Your time outside of work should all be relaxing, recharging, and soaking in a sense of calm.

Cozy Earth helps you do this because the fabric they use in their products, their sheets, their PJs, and their towels is just the softest, nicest, most comfortable fabric I have encountered. So I've gone down the list before of our Cozy Earth collection. We now have three pairs of Cozy Earth sheets to make sure that we always have a pair of Cozy Earth sheets on our bed, even if the other pairs are in the wash.

So that's something we did. I have a Cozy Earth sweatshirt, which is very comfortable and stays cool because of the viscose bamboo fabric they use. I really like those. My wife has the various Cozy Earth PJs. We have Cozy Earth towels. We just got the Cozy Earth duvet cover, so our duvet has that same fabric.

Anyways, I just find their fabric to be very, very comfortable, and so we swear by it. It feels good. It's sustainable. It's breathable. It's really good about not getting hot. It's just the most comfortable fabric stuff that we own. I think we're running out of things we don't own.

I think I don't have the pajama pants yet, so I'm going to get those. So I am a big Cozy Earth supporter. The good news is we have a big discount to offer you, which you should definitely use if you're going to order Cozy Earth. Wrap yourself in luxury this fall with Cozy Earth and go to cozyearth.com/deep and use that code "DEEP" for an exclusive discount of up to 40% off.

If you get a post-purchase survey, say you heard about Cozy Earth from the Deep Questions podcast, so they know you came from us. So cozyearth.com/deep. Use the code "DEEP" and mention us if you get to the podcast. All right, let me talk about comfortable things you can wear. I also want to talk about our friends at Roan, and in particular, their new commuter collection, the most comfortable, breathable, and flexible set of products known to man.

This collection has pants, it has dress shirts, it has quarter zips, it has polos, right? It's like everything you might need to wear for semi-formal, business casual, or casual wear. Four-way stretch fabric is very breathable and flexible. This is important for me. I get hot, especially if I'm giving a lecture, or I'm teaching all day, or I'm running from panel to panel.

This stuff is lightweight, and it breathes. It also has wrinkle-release technology. You travel with this stuff, just put that shirt on in the morning, it's going to look fine when you go to do your meeting, or what have you, or when you go out that night. It even has GoldFusion anti-odor technology, so it's great.

It looks great, it's flexible, it's breathable, the wrinkles go through. It just makes looking good easy, whatever it is that you're up to. The commuter collection can get you through any workday and straight into whatever comes next. Head to rhone.com/cal and use the promo code CAL to save 20% off your entire order.

That's 20% off your entire order when you head to rhone.com/cal and use that code CAL. It's time to find your corner office comfort. All right, Jesse, let's do some questions. First question is from Adam. "I work as the head of AI in a chaotic startup. "I've had to be on top of at least 15 simultaneous projects.

"There's always last-minute requests. "Do you think there's hope for me being able to carve out time "for deep work to contribute technically to these projects?" Well, look, we've got to face the productivity dragon here. Fifteen simultaneous projects are going to create 15 times whatever amount of work managing one product will require.

So this is going to be the meetings to check-ins and some level of interruptions. You multiply that by 15, it's probably every minute of your day. All right? You can make this more sustainable, right? So if you're managing a bunch of things, you can make it more sustainable. And my best advice for that would come from my book "A World Without Email." This book really gets into how collaboration should happen in a way that is more friendly for your brain.

And that book would say, "Look, if you have all these things going on, "you really have to start seeing unscheduled messages "that require responses. "You have to start seeing that as a productivity poison to kill. "That's what's getting you having to just jump back and forth "and context shift all day." So you can manage these projects better by having structured ways that you communicate with people, that you see the status of things, that you hold on to things until you have time to talk about it, more real-time conversation, less asynchronous back and forth.

You can make this work more palatable, but it's still going to take up all your time. So if you want to do deep work, which we'll think of that as more of a creating activity where managing these products is more of a cranking activity, that's a separate role. And if you want that role, you have to be explicit about it and you have to essentially get hired into that new role.

So either if you want to be doing deep work, you either say, "I don't want to be a manager," or you say, "I have this second role I want to take on. "I want to be hired into this second role "of technically contributing to these two projects. "And here's how much time this requires "and here's what I'm going to do it, and that time is now protected "and we've figured out how the other stuff should work." But if you're just thinking, "I have all this stuff going on "and I'm just hoping on my own to now fit deep work into there," you're not facing the dragon.

You have 15 projects worth of management to do. There's no time. So make that work less onerous by getting rid of all the unscheduled interruptions, but it doesn't make the work go away. If you want to do deep work, you've got to see, "How many hours do I have?" You have to treat it like a second job.

You have to say, "When am I going to do that second job?" You have to have a schedule that protects it. You've got to get permission from this, from the people who are above. Don't take it lightly and don't think that it's something you can just casually do. This sort of goes back a little bit to what I was talking about in the deep dive, which is we sort of mix together cranking and creating, and these are two separate things, and we can't just casually do both, and we can't just casually think of ourselves as both.

What we do to optimize one is different than what we would do to do the other thing well. Managing 15 projects well is a very different state to be in than making really good technical contributions to one thing. All right? So let's keep those separations clear. Let's keep the work sustainable, and then ask the question of, "Do I want to try to add in a second role and not take lightly what that would actually require?" I think we talked about this in old episodes, Jesse.

This might have even been before your time. I used to talk about if you have a real split role, like professors have this. You have all these service administrative roles, and you've got this really clear, deep role of producing research. You treat them like two different part-time jobs that have different scheduled hours, and you have different productivity systems for each, and you don't mix them at all.

It's like, "This is when I'm working at the GAP, and this is when I'm working at the banana stand," and they're in two different places, and they're two different jobs, and I don't do both at the same time, and I wear a different uniform here than I do over there, right?

And so we had this whole philosophy I talked about in the early episodes about if you have two jobs, treat them like two jobs, different systems, different times. When you're working on one, you're only working on one. When you're working on another, you're only working on another. What I fear for this question here, for Adam here, is he's at the GAP so long, there's no time for the banana stand, but he's still kind of deluding himself into thinking that there is.

All right, what do we got next? Next question is from Axel. "I'm not a believer of zero inbox. I'd rather handle it as an unprocessed task list. However, the number of unwanted messages that come in is overwhelming. I currently have 20,000 unread emails and counting, and I'm beginning to miss some important emails.

Can I use my inbox as a task list?" I mean, Axel, when you say, like, "I'm not a believer of, you know, cleaning out my inbox," it's like saying, "I'm not a believer that humans can't fly, so I'm going to go jump off this cliff." It doesn't matter what you believe or not, the truth is the truth.

And the truth in this case is your inbox is a terrible task list, and you can't use it as your task list. You see why. You have 20,000 unread emails. That's a terrible task list. That's not working. You're going to have to process things out of your email. If you have any sort of non-trivial type modern digital era knowledge work job, your email has to be seen like your physical mailbox would have been seen 25 years ago.

You wouldn't use your physical mailbox at your office 25 years ago as how you keep track of things, just letting stuff pile up in there. And just a few times a day, you go to the mail room and start just looking through all the stuff in your mailbox and like, "Oh, there's a memo.

I'm pulling something out. I'm working on that." Your inbox is the same way. I know there's more stuff that comes faster, so it's more of a pain to keep on top of, but you absolutely have to. What I suggest doing is role-based status list. So you have a different board or list for every role you have in your work.

Each of these boards or lists are divided into different statuses, stuff I don't know what to do with, I need to clarify, stuff that's on the back burner that I've committed to but don't have a timeline, stuff I'm working on this week, stuff to discuss at our weekly meeting with this person, stuff I'm waiting to hear back from someone about and what I should do once I hear back.

You got to have these statuses. Everything that comes in your inbox has to move on to one of these lists. You can copy text out of your inbox and paste it if you're using a digital tool like Trello or a Google document. You can carve this into clay with a chisel.

I don't care about what tools you're using, but the information has to get associated with a role, and within that role, it needs a particular status. And once you process something, you erase it from your inbox, and that is a perfect indicator. If it's in your inbox, that means you haven't got to it yet, and when you get to it, that's how you're processing it.

It's a pain, but it's the job. It's what you have to do. You are having a firehose of information coming at you. It doesn't go away if you organize it poorly. It's not easier to execute if you ignore it. Your day does not become less stressful if you pretend like those 20,000 things don't exist.

You got to process the information so you know what to do with it. So something like a role-based status list is the thing to do. Now this means your email checking becomes more consolidated because you're processing stuff, so you can spend an hour here and an hour there. It's not like a background activity.

If you're going to start doing this, it's also going to push you to move more interaction out of your inbox because you're like, "No, no, no, no. I don't want to be in my inbox so much anymore. I'm trying to keep it empty," and that's good because that will give you pressure to have better collaboration strategies that aren't happening with back-and-forth unscheduled messages.

I've written whole books about it, but you can't use your inbox. Here's the summary. You can't use your inbox as a to-do list. It's not a good to-do list. All right, who have we got? Next question is from Mandy. "How do you look at travel within your plans for a deep life?

We have found travel to be some of our most memorable experiences but also quite disruptive and expensive, plus a whole new ballgame now that we have a toddler. We sometimes have trouble determining when we should go somewhere and where, and there seems to be so many factors to weigh." Mandy, I think this really gets into our deep life discussion and in particular the difference between working backwards from a lifestyle vision and working forwards towards a goal.

I'm a big advocate of you have this clear vision for your lifestyle. What's important to us? What do we want our life to be like now and in five years from now and in 10 years from now? And then you work backwards from that vision saying, "Given our circumstances and opportunities and obstacles right now, how do we move closer to this vision?" This allows for sort of flexible, interesting thinking that reacts to the realities of your situation on the ground.

So you like travel, but that means there's elements of that that are probably part of your lifestyle vision. We like to go to interesting places or be exposed to interesting people or experience awe in nature. The specific things you're getting out of travel can show up in that vision.

How you get there just depends on what's going on. You have a toddler right now. So when you're figuring out how do we get closer to this lifestyle vision in the next few years, it's not going to involve we need to go to the Himalayas and spend three weeks because that doesn't make sense with a little kid.

That's not going to go well. So what I think might be happening here is instead of working backwards from your lifestyle vision, you're working forwards by committing to a more specific goal or activity that vaguely seems positive to you. So like, "We like travel. We should travel a lot." That's working forward to a goal, hoping doing this thing will make our life better, as opposed to working backwards from where you're trying to get.

And when it's, you know, if it's awe in nature or something, and before you had your kid, you were getting that by traveling to distance exotic locations. Well, when you have your kid, you're like, "Okay, well, that's not a reasonable thing to do right now until they get a little bit older, but how can we get on nature right now with a toddler?" Well, it's going to be more local.

Actually, what we're going to do is you start to get creative. Now, we live in D.C., but we're going to rent for this year this cabin up in like the Canaan Valley in West Virginia. It's like an hour and a half away or two hours away or something. We're going to start going there on the weekends.

We have a kid yet that doesn't have activities, and we're bored. We're stuck at home with the kid. So what if we had this cabin that we kind of rent? We're not going to buy it. We're just going to rent it. It's like a seasonal rental. We're going to keep going up there.

We have an Airbnb we do a lot. We're going to go up like twice a month and just really get to know this one beautiful area, and the Canaan Valley is a very beautiful area. Just don't go in the winter because it's, you know, roughly 10 times colder than Antarctica.

But it's otherwise like a really nice area, and think about it. You're like we're up there. We're getting to know it. There's these paths we do with the pack, and like you're obtaining the thing that's important to you, but in a way that makes sense for your current life because what's important was that thing that was important to you, not the particular idea you had in mind for how to do it, which was, you know, maybe we travel, we fly to, you know, we go down to Patagonia and do stuff like that.

So, OK, let's say the thing you like. I'm just running through some experiments here. Let's say the thing you liked about travel, the actual lifestyle component you liked was going to interesting places and meeting interesting people. You have a toddler at home now. OK, so how do we prioritize that?

Well, maybe we live near this city. So let's really get to know these different neighborhoods in the city or the restaurants over here or what's going on with-- There's this kids' theater down at the Kennedy Center now, and we're going to get a subscription there and go there every summer.

We're going to go there every weekend and, like, see these shows, and you can find ways to satisfy that vision given your current constraints, opportunities, and obstacles. That's lifestyle-centric planning. So this type of thing happens all the time where when we work forward instead of backwards, we get stuck.

We get stuck on, like, this particular thing is important even if it doesn't work anymore, and it's causing more trouble than harm. We're dragging a toddler on these long flights, and it's costing us a lot of money, and it's disrupting to our schedules, and we end up unhappy about it.

That's what happens when you focus on, like, this activity or goal is going to save me as opposed to this is what being safe looks like. What's our best way to get there right now? That's at the essence of lifestyle-centric planning. I would also say if you're frustrated about, you know, there's certain things that you would-- visions you'd like to get to that you can't get to right now with a toddler, this is a great time to do really forward thinking, right?

Now you start thinking, like, you know what, we're really missing-- maybe you really miss being overseas in certain places, or, like, you're in love with Scandinavia. You're like, "Yeah, it's hard with a toddler," or something like that. Now you can start thinking, "Hey, this is being clarified for us.

This piece of our vision is being clarified. How could we get to a life 5 years from now, 10 years from now, maybe, like, when our kid is in middle school or, like, even thinking to, like, when our kid goes to college where this is a much bigger part of our life because it's being clarified to us that this is important right now?" And now you start to think more creatively.

Well, you know, if you moved over to consulting and I was able to make this fully remote-- I can't do that now, but let's think about how that could work. There might be a situation here where we could spend 4 months out of the year, you know, living on this glacier.

Like, it could open up some really interesting long-term thinking as well. So all this comes down to make your lifestyle vision clear, work backwards flexibly and creatively towards, "How do I get closer to this given what I have available to me right now?" And it's going to open up lots of cool options.

"How can I find the most interestingness and happiness and subjective well-being right now?" It'll also clarify some of, like, more radical longer-term things you might do as well. So it's an opportunity, Mandy. This is not, I would say, a problem. All right, moving right along. Next up is Lisa.

"How can I communicate that I've heard enough of my partner's work issues without sounding like a jerk? I feel like I'm an unpaid staff that is always available for event session." I would say probably like a taser. You know what I'm saying? It's like if it gets past a certain threshold, just right down it goes.

Boom. I think it's like a Pavlovian thing there. So, like, over time, then he'll sort of pull it back. So, Lisa, actually, I think what's interesting here is probably what's going on with your partner. If he or she is venting a lot, so clearly they must be venting a lot.

Everyone vents a little bit, like, "Oh, man, so-and-so was a pain at work today." But if they're venting to the place where, like, you're thinking about my taser solution, their relationship to their job's no good. Like, you need to get them listening to my podcast. In particular, here's what I would worry that's going on.

When I hear someone who's an over-venter, like, all they can think about is the negatives of their job, and you're talking about it all the time, it typically means, like, they're feeling as if they have a lack of autonomy or efficacy. I don't really have control over what I do.

I don't feel like I'm able to do anything of any real value. You know, I'm a widget cranker, and it feels nihilistic. I'm the Ron Livingston character in office space. And in that situation, where you have no autonomy or efficacy, everything is a problem. And so you just see everything going on around you as a problem that is frustrating.

This is corrosive over time. It's sort of corrosive to your soul. So how do you get out of this trap of feeling like you don't have autonomy or efficacy? You follow the advice from my book, "So Good They Can't Ignore You." You build career capital. You invest career capital to move your work towards things that resonate and away from things that don't.

The process alone of acquiring career capital, which means getting good at things that are unambiguously rare and valuable in your field, that process alone of seeking mastery, already you're going to feel like you have autonomy. Like, "I'm getting better. I have a plan." And then when you begin investing this career capital, which means just using your skills as leverage to kind of control what your work and existence is like, things get even better.

You push it towards the stuff you like and away from the other stuff. And it's not that so much that there's some magical configuration for your job that is going to make everything better. It's the fact that you have control over your job that's going to make things feel better.

It's that autonomy, that efficacy. "I'm getting better. People think I'm good. "I'm using this to change how I do it. "I'm respected for what I'm doing. "I'm recognized for what I'm doing. "I use this as leverage to change the structure of my job, "so I don't do this and I do this," or whatever it is that you do.

That's the sweet spot where it's not that the things seem so much as a threat. They're a nuisance. They're amusing. They're like, "Yeah, so-and-so's crazy. Who cares? "Yeah, the management is, you know, blah, blah, blah. "Doesn't matter. I'm getting after it. "As I get this skill, I'm about to go full remote.

"We're going to move to that whatever, "that glacier in Finland." Like, there's an excitement to it. So that's what I would say is really going on here. If they're venting all the time, they got to change their relationship to their work. And so, "Okay, get them listening to my podcast.

"Get them a copy, if so good, they can't ignore you." Maybe what you should do for the near future is every time they vent past a certain threshold, just smack them with, "So good, they can't ignore you," and eventually there'll be like an osmosis thing where some of those ideas will just begin to seep through.

But work, it shouldn't be a source of constant venting, and that typically is less about who you're working with, what you're doing, and more about your relationship to your job. All right, what do we got next, Jesse? - We have our corner. - Woo, Slow Productivity Corner, let's hear that theme music.

(slow guitar music) For those who are new, we have one question every week that specifically relates to my most recent book, "Slow Productivity," we call it the Slow Productivity Corner. If you have not bought and read "Slow Productivity" yet, you need to, it's like the Bible for, I would guess, 50% of what we talk about on this show.

All right, Jesse, what's our Slow Productivity Corner question of the week? Question's from Dan, "I've owned an e-commerce business "for 23 years and spend nearly all my time on the computer. "How can I adhere to the slow productivity principles "with health issues that constantly interfere?" - Well, Dan, I would add an extra word to there, and I would say, you know, how could I possibly not adhere to the slow productivity principles with health issues that constantly interfere?

In other words, you're exactly in a situation, probably, where you need slow productivity. Because what is the opposite of slow productivity? If you don't have slow productivity, what are you probably facing? Pseudoproductivity. As we talked about in the deep dive of this episode, what is pseudoproductivity? It's the equation of visible effort for usefulness.

So in a pseudoproductivity regime, you have to just be rock and rolling, visibly and busily, all day long, every day, up to here. Like, you gotta have the thing pegged to 10 all the time, or you're seen as being unuseful or unproductive. That is a really hard state if you, for example, have health issues that means, "I can't have 100% energy all the time." You know, sometimes I can, sometimes I can't.

Maybe I have appointments I have to go to, or whatever it is, right? Pseudoproductivity is a disaster for anyone who doesn't have the privilege of being in a situation where you can just sort of crank it at 10 all day long. Why not? Pseudoproductivity is a game for, you know, 24-year-olds without families and plenty of energy who can just like exist off of Red Bull.

Slow productivity could be your savior here. Slow productivity says what matters is what you produce, not how you do it. It's about sustainability. It's about keeping your workload reasonable, being able to have some balance back and forth in your energy depending on what's demanded of the moment. And then over time, saying, "Judge the quality of what I do, not the quantity." That in particular is good if you have sort of a non-traditional energy reserves or time availability.

Because it means as you get better, as you get better, as your quality goes up, you get more and more flexibility, right? One way to think about this is if you can barely make things work in your current situation at your current level of skill, like, "Okay, I have the amount of money I make for this," or whatever, like, "It works, but it's very hard for me to produce this much stuff." You know, if you get twice as good, one of the options you have is to essentially, like, have the time you have to spend while keeping yourself in the same job position or earning situation, right?

And that might be much better, right? In other words, quality is one of the things you can trade quality for is much less actual total hours needed to work. And for people who are in situations where they have huge time demands or health issues, having greatly reduced hours compared to someone else is important.

And how do you do that without getting, like, part-time pay? You get really, really good, and instead of cashing in that skill to get more money, you cash in to get more flexibility. That's a key slow productivity principle. So I think slow productivity, you know, it's one of the advantages of this idea is that we can't all succeed in the pseudo-productivity regime.

We can't all just show up in the parking lot early, leave later, answer to every email chain as quickly as possible, always be there for the meeting in person. Not all of us can have that option as a means of sort of, like, getting ahead in the workplace. Slow productivity opens this up for so many more people, and it makes work sustainable.

It makes work not a drag on your emotional life. It makes work not a drag on your sort of, like, physical well-being. So, you know, Dan, I'm glad you found slow productivity. I think embracing those ideas might really be a positive thing for you. So I don't know if I explicitly made the connection between slow productivity and sort of accessibility more generally in the book, but I should have, because in the eight months since that book has come out, this connection has been made to me quite a bit.

All right, do we have a call this week, Jesse? - We do. - Ooh, let's hear it. - Okay. - Hi, this is Sarah. I'm a psychologist. I'm very eager to apply the principles of deep work to my life. The strategies offered and the how-tos have been very helpful.

However, I'm struggling with making a decision about what to choose. I'm in my 30s, and I work part-time. I've always had an inclination towards the arts, and now that I have the time, I would like to invest in it as a serious hobby and potentially turning it into a more serious endeavor.

I'm torn between music and visual arts, particularly photography. I took lessons in playing classical music for a few years before I stopped practicing due to the demands of graduate school. While I have more passion for music, I feel hopeless about becoming impressively good at it given my age, but I see more opportunities in engaging with visual arts.

Right now, I'm doing both, but my time is fragmented. I want to immerse myself in one and get really good at it. I would appreciate your guidance on this. All right, that's a good question. Let's generalize this question to be, "How can I—" not later in life, but I'm in my 30s, right?

I'm not just getting started. "How can I transform an interesting side hobby into a bigger part of my life?" In this case, a creative pursuit. I've got three things I want to suggest here that I think are going to be useful. One, I would— and I think you're picking this up in your question— avoid things that are notably winner-take-all in terms of their dynamics.

Professional music, let's say classical music, that's very winner-take-all in their dynamics in the sense that there are formal positions and orchestras that you can play these instruments. It is incredibly competitive, and the best players get to do it. Sports are very winner-take-all as well. You want to be an athlete, it's like, "Here are the teams.

There's a ton of people who want these spots. The very best people want these spots." That's for obvious reasons. These are difficult targets to go towards a little later in life. It's hard starting in your 30s to become one of the best French horn players in your city. It's hard in your 30s to become one of the best baseball players in the state.

So you want to avoid, when you're coming to this a little later and transforming something on the side to something bigger, be worried about significant winner-take-all dynamics. It's like businesses, small businesses, don't have this. There's room for lots of different businesses to do lots of different things. Visual arts, I think you're picking up on this right.

There's room in there for you to have an interesting visual art career because you are doing something unique. That there's a big enough population who likes, you can make an interesting living doing that. It's not winner-take-all. Two, really lean into deliberate practice. Your time is limited, both in terms of how much you have available to work on the side pursuit because you have other things going on and in how much time you have to get good because you're not 16 anymore.

Deliberate practice is the most efficient way to get better at things. It means the time you spend trying to get better at something should be working on carefully designed activities that are designed to stretch you to get better at something that's critical in your field. It's like if you want to become a visual artist, don't just take a lot of photos.

If you want to become a writer, don't just write your pages every day. You've got to find a way now to get training. I want every minute that I'm working on this right now to be stretching me to get better. Doing something I don't do well with guidance on how to do it better and then getting harsh feedback on whether or not I actually got there.

You've got to join things, work with people, get in the writers' groups, take classes, difficult classes like in photography, try to get exhibited in amateur minor things. You need the pressure, you need the training, you need the stretch. You don't want to waste the time. You want the time you're spending to be really high quality.

And the final piece of advice I'd offer here, and this also comes from my book, So Good They Can't Ignore You, use money as a neutral indicator of value. So in particular, when you're deciding like, should I make this side hobby into my full-time job, don't just guess I'm ready to do it.

Don't just say, predict, I bet this would, I bet I could pull this off. Actually get people to give you money. And the reason why we use that term neutral indicator of value is that it means nothing for people to give you praise. People are happy to praise you.

They're happy to say, this is great. You should do this. You should open a gallery. But people hate to give away their money unless they're really getting value for it. So if people are buying your photos, it's an indication they're good. If people are telling you, we love your photos, it means nothing.

If people are buying your albums, your music is good. If they're not, it's not ready yet for you to do full-time. If you can sell your articles, if you've got a book deal for your book, then you're on to something with your writing. If you haven't, you haven't. So let money be the neutral judge finally that tells you, okay, this stuff is at a good enough level.

In my book, this phrase comes from Derek Sivers, who talked about using this when he quit his job to become a full-time musician. He waited until he was making roughly his salary as a musician on the side to quit his job. And then when he started his company, CD Baby, he didn't go full-time to doing that company until the money it was making was more or less what he was making from his music.

And he's like, great, now I can move over to that. And he introduced this phrase. He's like, I use money as a neutral indicator of value. That's how I knew something was good enough for me to now trust this to be my full-time thing. So avoid things with significant winner-take-all dynamics.

You want to find things where there's lots of little niches in which you could find an interesting home. Deliberate practice as much as possible. The time you have to spend on the side thing, make that time useful. And three, if you're going to make something side into your full-time thing, make sure you're using money as your neutral indicator of value.

Everyone will tell you that your kid really looks good, but if they don't hire them for the modeling contract, don't take them out of school. You know what I'm saying? So same thing sort of here. Money, people don't lie with that. You know, Jesse, people often misunderstand Derek's quote.

And so they think when he says money is a neutral indicator of value, that it means the amount of money you have tells people how valuable you are as like a person or something, which is like the opposite. Derek gave away all the money he made when he sold the CD Baby.

He just went, no, no, it's a neutral indicator of the value of what you're doing, so you know whether or not it's working or not. - Right. - Yeah. All right, we got a case study here. This is where people send in their own experiences putting the type of advice we talk about on the show in the practice in their own life.

If you have a case study, you can send it to jesse@calnewport.com. Today's case study is from Filippa, who writes, "I was a lawyer for 20 years, but never really enjoyed it "for the obvious reasons. "I'm also a single mother of three teens. "Nevertheless, I put in the hours, "and I was eventually promoted to equity partnership.

"I was actually able to change some of the culture "over a five-year period. "I bought lots of copies of Deep Work." Oh, "I actually bought lots of copies of Deep Work. "The next step was to apply to become CEO "so that I could continue educating my firm "about the benefits of your messages.

"I talked about that stuff in my interview "while the other candidates focused on profits, "bonus systems, and billable hours. "I did get the CEO job, however, "and I didn't make any sudden moves. "A little time passed, and I was offered two consultancy jobs. "My law firm allowed me to work there one day per week.

"As per your advice, I wanted to first find out "if there was a desire for my skills outside of law. "The other element which was essential to me "being able to take these steps "was having a brilliant financial planner. "He was able to help me manage my finances "to ensure that I planned out my savings and expenditures "with a goal in mind.

"It turned out there was, and 18 months later, "I was able to hand in my notice to the law firm "and walk away. "I have now been offered the CEO role "of one of the firms starting in 2025. "This gave me 12 months to take some time with my daughters "and to work on a book.

"Over the summer, I took my kids around Europe for a month, "something I could never have found the time for "nor the mental energy to do "when I was working all the hours as a lawyer. "The firm I will join is a financial advice firm "with a totally different culture.

"Your sage advice has led me to a place "where I honestly wake up excited for the day." All right, there's some great examples here of various things we've talked about on the show, including in today's episode. One is lifestyle-centric planning. Working backwards from what do I want my life to be like, and then looking for a flexible way forward to get there.

I can assure you, if we go back 10 years, right, and say to Philippa, "What do you want to do? "What's your strategy?" Where she is now is not something that you would just naturally come up with. "Well, what I'm gonna do is be the CEO "of a financial advising firm." Like, it's not like an obvious thing to do, but working backwards from her lifestyle vision, she worked her way through what was available in the moment to get closer and closer, and these opportunities were excavated as she proceeded.

It's like people who work backwards from lifestyle visions end up in deep lives in ways they never could have predicted the full path of in advance. So I really like to see that example. Now, when you do this, when you're working backwards from a lifestyle vision, I said, look, I often talk in generalities.

I said, "Yeah, you gotta work with, like, "what are your opportunities and obstacles "that you face right now, and how do you make the most, "given that, how do you find flexible ways forward?" or something like that. We get some specifics in here of what that might mean. It's like, what are a couple things that were tried here?

Well, one thing she tried was doing this one day a week in a different type of work, right? That is an interesting move when you're trying to explore, "I'm trying to get closer to this lifestyle. "This type of work might get me there. "I don't know how, so let me dedicate one day a week "to this work and see what I learn." I think that's gonna open up options, and it did.

The other thing I really wanna underscore here is financial planning. I've actually added this to the "Deep Life" book I'm working on now. I talk about lifestyle-centric planning, working backwards from your lifestyle, not forward towards a ground goal, and I have this chapter I'm adding where I'm like, "Here's three really useful things to keep in mind "when you're coming up with these plans working backwards," and one of them is financial.

This can open up so many interesting paths that would otherwise be unavailable. When you get careful about your money and transparent about your money, "I know how much we make and how much we spend," and you can create a lot of give in there. "Hey, I got promoted to equity partner, "but we're still living what I was on "as a fourth-year associate," right?

We have all this flexibility and give. Our lifestyle's not too inflated. We're careful with our investments. I can turn the money and expenses up and down. Being careful with your finances just really expands the options you have when you're trying to explore different ways to get closer to your lifestyle, and we see exactly this here.

It allowed Philippa to take a year off and then to move to this other position. I'm sure it's probably not as well-paid as being an equity partner. So it's financial planning. It's like one of these tools you can use when you're trying to feel your way towards this lifestyle vision you have.

The more control and flexibility you have in your finances, the more paths that are actually open to you. So I think there's a lot of cool on-the-ground concrete tactics captured in this one story. All right, we got a final segment coming up, but before we do, let's hear from another sponsor.

I want to talk in particular about our friends at MyBodyTutor. I've known Adam Gilbert, MyBodyTutor's founder, for many years. He used to be the fitness advice expert for my blog in the early days. Here's the cool thing about his company, MyBodyTutor. It solves the biggest problems that people face when trying to get healthier, which is consistency.

It's not too hard to figure out what it means to eat healthy. It's not too hard to figure out that you should exercise a lot. The knowledge is not the problem. The problem is actually doing all these things and adapting as needed to the unique problems in your life.

This is where MyBodyTutor comes in. When you sign up, they connect you to a coach. And this coach helps you come up with, "Hey, here's what we're doing with nutrition. Here's what we're doing with exercise. And then here's the key thing." You check in every day. It's not time-consuming.

They have this, it's an app. It's simple. You press a few buttons. Here's what I ate. Here's what I did for exercise. But you have the accountability of checking in with your coach every day. And that makes all the difference. Knowing there's someone who cares about you and your health and is gonna see what you did that day makes you actually consistent.

It helps you actually act on the things you know you should be doing. And because you have this coach, they can also help you adapt. "Oh my God, I'm traveling for the holidays. I'm not gonna have access to my gym. I'm worried about the food. What should I do?" Like they can help you adapt, but you get that accountability.

And because the coaches are online, you're connected via the internet. It's not a physical trainer coming to your house or a nutritionist coming to your house. It's a fraction of the cost of what it would be to actually do this the old-fashioned way with people in your house. So if you wanna get healthier, this is how you do it, MyBodyTutor.

So the good news is, Adam is giving Deep Questions listeners $50 off their first month. All you have to do is mention the Deep Questions podcast when you sign up. So go to MyBodyTutor.com. Sign up and mention that you came from the Deep Questions podcast. I also wanna talk about our longtime friends at Blinkist.

Blinkist is an app that gives you more than 6,500 book summaries and expert-led audio guides to read and listen to in just 15 minutes per title. You can access best-in-class actionable knowledge from 27 categories such as productivity, psychology, and more on the go and get entertained at the same time.

I think reading is very important. I talk about it all the time on this show. And as I've mentioned, Jesse and I use Blinkist as part of our reading ritual. What we do is if there's a book that interests us, we add that to our Blinkist queue, and then we get a chance, we listen to the blink or read the blink, takes 15 minutes, and that's how we figure out, ooh, should I buy this book or not?

There's other ways you can do this as well. The summaries are entertaining on their own. It's a quick way to survey a field. But I find it to be like a great sort of assistant for helping to triage possible books and figure out what it is you want to read.

There's a good feature I want to mention right now called Blinkist Connect. So right now with Blinkist, you can give another person unlimited access for free. So you basically get a two for one deal. So you don't want to miss that. All right, so let's talk deals here. Right now, Blinkist has a special offer just for our audience.

Go to blinkist.com/deep to start your seven-day free trial, and you will get 40% off a Blinkist premium membership. That's Blinkist spelled B-L-I-N-K-I-S-T. Blinkist.com/deep to get 40% off and a seven-day free trial. That's blinkist.com/deep. And remember, now for a limited time, you can even use Blinkist Connect to share your premium account.

You will get two premium subscriptions for the price of one. All right, Jesse, let's go to our final segment. I want to react today in our final segment to an interesting piece of news that someone sent to my interesting@calnewport.com email list. I have this article up on the screen for those who are listening instead of-- I mean, watching instead of just listening.

All right, this is from CNBC. Here is the headline of the article. Whole Foods CEO swears by one productivity-boosting strategy. Quote, "I don't get stuck in meeting after meeting." All right, I'm intrigued. What is the one productivity-boosting strategy that prevents him from getting stuck in meeting after meeting? Let's go down to the article body here.

All right. And I'm going to read the first couple of paragraphs. Whole Foods Market CEO Jason Buchel has one primary tactic that keeps him productive, he says. Time blocking. "It's important that I time block my schedule "so I don't get stuck in meeting after meeting "and I can focus on Whole Foods Market's "longer-term vision and strategy.

"The time blocking method involves "carving out specific windows of time "for high-priority work tasks. "Spending time in physical stores "is a big priority for Buchel, for example, "so he reserves time in his calendar each Friday "to visit at least one location." All right, let's stop right there. He's using the term time blocking, more or less how I use it.

When I talk about time blocking, I do mean giving every minute of the day a job so that you're executing a plan for your time as opposed to just deciding as the day goes on, what should I work on next? Where we differ here a little bit is typically when I talk about time blocking, I talk about time blocking the current day.

It's hard to build a detailed time block plan for more than one day at a time. Now, what the Whole Foods CEO here is talking about is time blocking out in advance. So how do we rectify this with my type of advice? I'm not sure if I would use the term time blocking, but what he's capturing here is a mixture of weekly planning and autopilot scheduling.

All right, so in my cosmology of personal productivity, weekly planning is where at the beginning of the week you survey what's on your calendar and say, "What is it? What is my week? "What are my priorities? "Do I want to shift anything around? "Do I want to cancel anything?" And one of the things you do during your weekly plan is say, "What are my big goals?

"Do I want to protect some time this week, "which I will treat like any other meeting or appointment, "to make progress on my big goals?" It makes sense to do that at the beginning of the week. So that's time blocking in the sense that you're blocking off time, but you're doing it at the beginning of your week.

So let's say the CEO had some priority of like, "I'm really working on understanding "our market demographics. "We really have to change things around." He might then, when he's doing his weekly plan, find a couple of blocks to block off the focus on like reading through those reports or something.

The other thing this is relevant to is autopilot scheduling, which is actually what I think he's doing in the specific example he gives here. That's where you have something you know you need to do on a regular basis, so you set it up on your calendar to appear on a regular basis.

So the CEO of Whole Foods wants to spend Fridays going to a location. That's an autopilot schedule right there. The Fridays are all blocked off or certain times are blocked off in advance, going to locations, right? So stuff you know you need to do that's important that happens on a regular schedule, just get that on your schedule in advance.

So if you're doing these things, weekly planning and autopilot scheduling, now when you get to a particular day and you're time blocking that day, there might already be quite a few things on there that have already been placed in advance that are important. So you might not actually have that much free time left to block.

All right, now there's another little tip that's given in here, which I really like. This is a in-the-trenches tactical tip around meetings coming from someone who gets a lot of meetings. So let me read this for you here, 'cause I like this idea. "Getting calendar bombed by unproductive meetings can derail his day." He recently told LinkedIn's "This Is Working" podcast and video series.

"Bugle's daily time block schedule, though, means he's only going to meetings that I really need to be there for and that are only as long as they need to be. On a typical day, Bugle can have 10 meetings or more, he tells Makeit. The company encourages staff to hold 20 and 50-minute meetings to free up 10-minute intervals in between during which they can work on any action items discussed.

He uses these 10-minute windows for running ad hoc meetings with my direct reports or dealing with a pressing issue that might pop up." This is a fantastic idea. Again, it's not time block planning, but the post-meeting block is something that I regularly recommend. It's something that plays a big role in my book, "Slow Productivity." The idea is when you schedule a meeting, you have to schedule 10 or 15 minutes immediately following the meeting for processing and taking action on what was just discussed.

Otherwise, if you stack meetings without an air gap on your schedule, what's going to happen is you're going to get a bunch of stuff in this meeting that needs to be done, you have to think through, new obligations are now on your plate, and they're going to be right there in your brain as you move right into the next meeting.

Completely different context, completely different demands. And now you're trying to remember these while new things are coming up. And then you go to your next meeting. If there's no cognitive air gap, then that's going to begin piling up and it's exhausting and it's stressful and you're going to forget things.

You have 15 minutes or 10 minutes after each meeting, you say, "Great. All right, let me figure out what this meant. Let me go to my role-based status list and put tasks on here. Let me update my calendar. Let me send out the emails that I promised. Like, okay, I'm going to follow up on this.

Let me send that email now. Hey, Jesse, we just had a meeting about it. Here's what we discussed. We want you to be involved. Here's the feedback we need. Let me give you a bit of a process here because I do process-centric emailing. I created a shared document. Please put your thoughts in there.

You can wait till Friday. If you have any questions, like grab me at my next office hours, let me send that off." You're closing all the loops from the meeting. So you can go to the meeting with a fresh start. And what I like about this particular way that the CEO talked about it is because he's in big meetings with big teams, he brings his direct reports with him to the post-meeting block.

That's pretty clever, right? Now that I think about this, I usually do this at my faculty meetings. After a big faculty meeting at my department, you have a quick impromptu post-meeting with like two people from the department to figure out the thing that involves both of you or all of you, right?

So I like this idea that he will bring his direct reports into the after-action meeting and together they make sense of, "Okay, what are we doing next, if anything, because of this meeting?" All right, so we got a couple of good ideas here. Plan important stuff on your calendar in advance, whether this is in daily time block planning, weekly planning, or autopilot scheduling.

And when you're scheduling meetings, add an after-meeting block for you or you and your most closest collaborators to make sense of and close every loop about what you just discussed. So there we go. Real productivity advice from the wild. All right, well, that's all the time we have for today's episode.

Thank you, everyone, who sent in your questions or calls. We'll be back next week. And until then, as always, stay deep. So if you like today's discussion about cranking versus creating, I think you might also like episode 291, which was titled, "Do Better, Do Less." Check it out, because it highlights a key principle from my book, "Slow Productivity," about how to move your professional life away from busyness and toward producing results that matter.