Productivity is crucial for organizational success and individual career advancement. As leaders strive to achieve more with limited resources, they must foster productivity throughout their teams and within themselves. While productivity seems simple at its core - completing necessary tasks effectively - it requires conscious effort and intention.
Today we will examine research-backed strategies for planning one's day intentionally in order to maximize productivity through efficiency and meaningful prioritization.
Research-Informed Principles of Productive Planning
Several principles emerge from productivity research as important factors in intentional planning. First, prioritizing key tasks based on importance and urgency allows focus on high-impact work (Cooley & Lyness, 1999). Second, minimizing distractions and intentionally structuring one's environment support flow and focus (Mark et al., 2008). Third, scheduling intentional breaks recharges one's capacity to focus and avoid burnout (Trougakos & Hideg, 2009). Finally, reflective review of one's schedule and tasks promotes continuous improvement (Macan, 1996). Intentional planning applies these principles.
Prioritization: The Eisenhower Matrix provides a simple yet powerful framework for prioritizing tasks (Covey et al., 1994). It divides tasks into four quadrants based on importance and urgency: important/urgent; important/not urgent; not important/urgent; not important/not urgent. Leaders should focus first on important/urgent tasks to address pressing needs while also carving out time for important/not urgent long-term projects to drive future success. Tasks low in both dimensions can usually be delegated or deleted.
Intentional Structure: Productive leaders intentionally structure their environment and mindset to minimize distractions. They may work from a private office or home space with minimal clutter, background noise, and desktop notifications disabled on devices (Mark et al., 2008). Some implement a digital minimalism philosophy, carefully curating only the most useful apps and sites they need (Lee, 2019). Strong boundaries also allow focus uninterrupted by emails or calls at designated work times.
Scheduled Breaks: While dedication is vital, constant focus leads to burnout over time. Leaders must schedule intentional breaks to recharge as studies show performance declines after 90 minutes of uninterrupted work (Trougakos & Hideg, 2009). Breaks foster creativity by giving the mind space to solve problems unconsciously. Leaders may implement a 52/17 rule - working intensely for 52 minutes then breaking for 17 to stay fresh (Levitin, 2016). Walks, stretches, brief conversations or people-watching work well as breaks.
Reflective Review: Weekly or monthly reviews allow leaders to reflect on progress, adjust priorities as needed, and remove completed tasks. Did important projects receive sufficient focus? What tasks took more or less time than planned? Reflection fosters continuous process improvement based on self-awareness of strengths, weaknesses and time management tendencies (Macan, 1996). Leaders use lessons from the past to better plan upcoming schedules with increased productivity and efficiency.
Applying Intentional Planning
With research-backed principles in mind, leaders can operationalize intentional planning with focused actions. The following recommendations provide a practical framework when integrated thoughtfully based on one's leadership role and organizational context.
Weekly Planning Rituals: Designating a weekly planning time sets the foundation for an intentional, productive week. On Fridays or weekends, leaders review objectives and priorities for the coming week based on short and long-term strategic plans. Key meetings, deadlines, projects and tasks populate a schedule optimized for flow and focus (Covey et al., 1994). It provides structure without being rigidly restrictive.
Daily Standup Meetings: As a manager, starting each morning with a 15-minute checkpoint meeting grounds the team (Kniberg & Ivarsson, 2012). Members briefly share goals for the day, any roadblocks, and how they can help each other. It re-centers everyone on that day's most important work through transparency and collaboration. Leaders model accountability by sharing their priorities as well.
Intentional Task Tracking: Tools like Trello or Asana provide flexibility for productive tracking. Leaders break larger projects into discrete action items, assign due dates, add comments, and mark items complete - creating psychological accountability. Some prefer paper planners or notebooks for their mobility and ability to minimize digital distractions (Seinfeld & Seinfeld, 2017). The method matters less than intentionality.
Meaningful Meetings: Leaders assess each recurring meeting for its purpose and productivity. Some may be combined or replaced with asynchronous collaboration. Others have clear agendas and time limits enforced. For important brainstorming sessions, leaders schedule working time afterward to ensure ideas turn into action. People's busiest times, like early mornings, are respected to optimize workflow throughout the day (Covey et al., 1994).
Protecting Deep Work Time: Leaders reserve blocks of distraction-free "deep work" time for complex problem-solving and creative efforts critical to the organization's success (Newport, 2016). They disable notifications, close non-essential programs and communicate unavailability. Such intense focus allows solving important issues that advance strategic initiatives. It also serves as a model for their direct reports' most meaningful work habits.
Intentional Planning in Action
Large organizations incorporate intentional planning principles despite complex demands. At Google, managers regularly refine focus areas and priorities with their team based on goals and objectives (Schmidt & Rosenberg, 2014). Every two weeks, employees draft OKRs - Objectives and Key Results - allowing measurement and continuous learning. Facebook dedicates 20% of employees' time to passion projects, buffering against burnout and fostering innovation (McGinn & Borden, 2017).
For smaller firms, Basecamp exemplifies intentional remote work through accountability and transparency. Daily standups keep dispersed teams coordinated through a chat interface. Project planning tools provide structure without over-structuring creativity (Heylighen & Dewaele, 2002). The company cultivates a results-focused culture through autonomy balanced with responsibility.
Conclusion
Productivity relies on intentionally planning one's schedule to focus on the highest priorities through efficient structuring, reflective review and meaningful breaks. Research identifies techniques for prioritizing tasks, minimizing distractions, and optimizing workflow - all integrated thoughtfully based on leadership roles and organizational context. Large innovative firms worldwide incorporate principles like protected deep work time, consistent reviews, and passion projects. With strategic application, leaders inspire high output amid competing demands through intentional habits and an optimized workflow that inspires peak performance. Overall, productivity stems from intentionality in planning each day, week and career through research-grounded practices tailored purposefully.
References
Cooley, E., & Lyness, K. (1999). The importance of time: Effects of scheduling on performance in a complex dual-task environment. Work & Stress, 13(4), 321–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678379950019665
Covey, S. R., Merrill, A. R., & Merrill, R. R. (1994). First things first: To live, to love, to learn, to leave a legacy. Simon and Schuster.
Kniberg, H., & Ivarsson, A. (2012). The team and organizational impacts of Scrum. InfoQ. https://www.infoq.com/articles/scrum-impacts-organization/
Levitin, D. J. (2016). The distracted mind: Ancient brains in a high-tech world. mit Press.
Macan, T. H. (1996). Time-management training: Effects on time behaviors, attitudes, and job performance. The Journal of Psychology, 130(3), 229–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1996.9915005
Mark, G., Gonzalez, V. M., & Harris, J. (2005, April). No task left behind?: examining the nature of fragmented work. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 321-330).
McGinn, K. L., & Borden, A. (2017). Firms of endearment: How world-class companies profit from passion and purpose (2nd ed.). Pearson.
Newport, C. (2016). Deep work: Rules for focused success in a distracted world. Grand Central Publishing.
Schmidt, E., & Rosenberg, J. (2014). How Google Works. Hachette UK.
Seinfeld, J., & Seinfeld, S. (2017). The coffeehouse investor: How to build wealth, ignore wall street, and get on with your life. Currency.
Trougakos, J. P., & Hideg, I. (2009). Momentary work recovery: The role of within-day work breaks. In Current perspectives on job-stress recovery (pp. 37-58). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Jonathan H. Westover, PhD is Chief Academic & Learning Officer (HCI Academy); Chair/Professor, Organizational Leadership (UVU); OD Consultant (Human Capital Innovations). Read Jonathan Westover's executive profile here.
Comments