Heres why you need to make yourself a To-Not-Do list

Heres why you need to make yourself a To-Not-Do listHeres why you need to make yourself a To-Not-Do listMost of you reading this post have drawn up thousands of To-Do lists. Some scrawled by hand on the backs of tattered envelopes or napkins, others color-coded, numbered, and lined up shiny and straight in the latest electronic to-do software.But how many of you have ever drawn up a To-Not-Do list?Given time is your most precious resource, I contend it is essential to give regular, disciplined thought to what you should stop doing. Maybe not every day, but at least once or twice a month.When I work with leaders, they often conclude they need mora time for coaching, hiring, training, or motivating. Or they recognize that theyve been eaten alive by urgent day-to-day tasks, neglecting critical strategy, planning, or innovation projects.So at the start of our leadership programs, we dedicate some serious attention to pruning away less valuable activities.Are you ready for the same challe nge? Making time may just enable you to finally implement that game-changing process improvement or marketing strategy. Or to start training the two new team members whove been spinning their wheels. (And actually get home before 8 pm)Here are some questions to consider as you build your first To-Not-Do list1. What more can you delegate?Be fierce. Too many managers feel guilty when transferring a task. But if delegating something frees up more of your time to coach, innovate, fix things, or identify new opportunities, your team will benefit (not suffer) due to your increased delegation. Besides, theyll likely be stretched, developed, and possibly even flattered when given the new task(s), if you frame things well. Dont sandbag your own delegation efforts by thinking itll take less time to do myself. Yes, the first and second times you delegate this task, youre probably right. But not the 3rd thru the 25th times.2. What would you stop doing ASAP do if it were your own geschftliches m iteinander?If you were writing personal checks twice a month to cover key business investments and to pay your team what uses of your own (and your teams) time would you jettison immediately?3. What are you doing by habit that has outlived its usefulness?That report you write up each Thursday? A committee membership with long, drawn-out monthly meetings which you could probably resign from (citing long service) or delegate to someone else with fresher ideas?4. What are you doing that feels urgent in the moment, but not nearly as important as other things waiting to get done?Many leaders time is eroded by these squeaky wheel items that come at them. Empower others to handle situations OR simply draw a line on which conversations or problems youll get drawn into.5. Are there activities you should put on a (time) budget?Could you limit pick your brain conversations with career advice seekers or corporate colleagues whose work isnt related to your own to, say, 1 hour a month? Could you trim email time by checking and handling email during only 3 or 4 predictable blocks each day? Could you develop kind polite tactics to cut short interviews with candidates who you realize (5 min into the chat) are really not a fit?Somethings gotta give. Too much comes at us. I challenge you to peer with a critical eye on your current to-do lists, calendars, or memories of recent days. Identify 3 lower value activities you should eliminate, delegate, or shrink. So that your genuinely important projects and leadership activities such as coaching or client care dont get lost in that relentless to-do-list shuffle.This article first appeared on Catalyze.

Why So Many People Wont Talk to You, if You Arent a Wireless Phone (Part I)

Why So Many People Wont Talk to You, if You Arent a Wireless Phone (Part I) Why So Many People Wont Talk to You, if You Arent a Wireless Phone (Part I) Because of wireless technology, those who are far are near those who are near (say, in a shared elevator) are far.Youre at a bus stop, or on a train, with lots of time before your long daily commute to or from the office is over once again, with a time scale comparable to a long thumb-twiddling wait in a crowded hospital waiting room.In the old days, i.e., when voices were identified with faces much more than with phones, the time might be pleasantly or comfortingly passed in harmless, maybe useful conversation with at least one of the strangers near you.The Near as Far, the Far as NearBut thats all changed Now fruchtwein of those who, in the course of a day, are physically very near (e.g., the strangers next to you on the bus) are automatically socially very distant and irrelevant, whereas, those whom you already know who are physi cally distant but already socially near are the only ones who have any relevance during your commute- thanks to the cell and smartphones and similar devices.Think about it Most of those who are physically near are socially far (because we dont already know them) others whom we know who are physically far are socially near (because we already do, even if minimally, e.g., only through facebook inc or LinkedIn).This is a painful paradox as unfortunate as it is comic, because of the needless erosion and rejection of person-to-person opportunities and connections it sums up. It can indeed be characterized as ludicrous or tragicomic- especially in an age when so many live lives of seemingly unremitting, bedrngnis-so-splendid isolation, if bedrngnis loneliness, or the more extreme kind of distancing- alienation.The extreme manifestation of this imbalance takes the form of a preference for or default to socially close, but physically distant relations- what I call conversationships, e.g., t hose based on Skype, email, mobile phones and/or social media.A less extreme form of this imbalance is motivated by the impracticalities and time limitations of busy modern life, rather than by a preference rooted in the relative inexpensiveness of long-distance conversationships of the kind discussed below, e.g., their smaller time and financial investments required.The Office as Humanizing SanctuaryTo add a layer of irony to the shroud of paradox, it should be noted that one aforementioned milieu, in which the person who is near is recognized as being a whole person, is frequently stereotyped as being a highly impersonal environment the office.True, a lot of customer and client service is conducted remotely, e.g., through call centers. But much- very much- is not, and, on top of that, most office staff interactions are face-to-face, especially in smaller organizations.Hence the irony the venue that etched its not personal, its business into our collective consciousness is the same venue that is one of the last bastions of the wonderfully friendly bus-stop chit-chat face-to-face conversation-with-strangers-is-OK mentality (as the bulk of office-based business is, given a revolving, evolving clientele).The nagging question is why has this happened? Why is it that so many people will not talk to you these days if you are not a phone or someone they already know (to put it as vividly as possible) on that phone?Yes, obviously, they are still talking to their friends and acquaintances.But because long-distance conversation is mediated by the phone, because their voices are directed at the phone, because these people will not speak to a stranger unless their lives depend on it (as opposed to their more customary assumption that staying alive will depend on not talking to that stranger), one may be forgiven for forming the impression that these xenophobes would sooner talk into a new phone than directly with a new person.The Age of the PhonophileAs suggested above, it may be that many of them talk to their friends as an excuse to use or flaunt their gadgets. They are not merely xenophobes, fearful of or hostile to strangers. They are also phonophiles in love with their smartphones, oblivious to the reality that a modern mobile phone is largely an advertising platform designed to promote consumerism.However, the allure of digital technology and stranger-danger angst do not fully account for the displacement of nearby humans by distant phone-equipped cyborgs (in the form of a human firmly clutching a mobile phone, which makes it as permanent as a cyborg implant).No, its not merely a question of feeling safe with those who are familiar, however distant nor is it merely the novelty and convenience of the digital devices.(On the other hand, those who like to make prank, obscene or other phone calls to strangers could be called xenophonophiles (stranger-on phone-lovers)- including telemarketers, who seem to be the only people who never tire of calli ng complete strangers.)There is more- much more involved here that needs to be noted, if the near is far far is near paradox is to be understood and, just as importantly, addressed. Fundamentally, what is involved here is not just a shift to a new technology, but also a shift to a new perception of what it means (to cease) to be human.The Roots of PhonophiliaIn thinking about this issue and challenge, Ive identified a number of factors underlying this modern xenophobia-phonophilia nexus. Heres the main list, to be explored and developed in Part II (as the continuation dots suggest)The rise of the cyborgs The machines have spoken- they are more interesting than we are in and as the flesh. So an mobile phone trumps the stranger.Stranger danger Time on a mobile phone is perceived as a safer choice than time chatting with a stranger (most of whom are dangerous, according to the news and movies on your smartphone).Time stress work, family and other time stress and tradeoffs leave little to no time for strangers- anywhere, anytime.Victory of the machines in stimulation wars Digital communications technology and entertainment platforms have made the prospect of talking with a stranger generally unintriguing, unstimulating, unexciting, and neither exotic nor adventurous.Homogenization and trivialization of human assets Although the kind of tribal groupiness that Facebook thrives on suggests homogeneity and sameness of formats and interests, being special remains a predominant goal of social media, even if it means being special only within ones group or being a member of a special group. Discovering that a stranger has all your toys trivializes them, you and others who have them. So, talking with strangers pays no dividend.Customization of strangers Ironically, concurrent with the boredom or trivialization caused by mass homogenization of tastes and lifestyle toys is the chore of dealing with the reverse situation- customization, especially those of strangers, when tr ying to relate to them and their idiosyncratic hobbies, preoccupations and tastes would be too much of a chore.Increased machine-based conversational control Because we can turn off social interactions more easily by phone, e.g., by blaming bad reception, wireless interactions are more easily controlled and limited than face-to-face interactions.Superiority of digital to face-to-face information flow Some forms of digitally transmitted information are more precise, reliable, informative and compact than face-to-face, e.g., seeking hotel information while on holiday with an iPhone or text messaging, which despite all of its limitations and flaws is at least free of the endless Im likes of oral-aural conversation between anyone under 45.Diminishing marginal utility of strangers Ive said it before and will say it again (having first said it when I was a teenager) People are like fractions- the more you multiply them, the smaller they get. The greater the population densities to which w e are exposed in any given situation or city, the less value each additional stranger has in our perception of and interaction with them. Indeed, beyond a certain population density point, their diminishing marginal utility morphs into negative disutility, e.g., annoyance with them.A Small Step for an PhonophileIf you are a phonophile and still hesitate to talk with strangers face-to-face, despite whatever consciousness-raising reading this has sparked, you may take one small, safe, compromise step toward bridging the abyss that separates you from them Get strangers in an elevator to read this articleon your smartphone, or theirs._________________Next in Part II the detailed anatomy of phonophile xenophobia and its impact.

3D Printing Innovator Charles Hull to Deliver IMECE Opening Ke...

3D Printing Innovator Charles Hull to Deliver IMECE Opening Ke... 3D Printing Innovator Charles Hull to Deliver IMECE Opening Ke... 3D Printing Innovator Charles Hull to Deliver IMECE Opening KeynoteAug. 11, 2017 Additive manufacturing pioneer Charles W. Hull, co-founder and chief technology officer of 3D Systems, has been selected as the speaker for the Opening Keynote at the ASME 2017 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition (IMECE). IMECE 2017, the worlds largest interdisciplinary mechanical engineering conference, will take place from Nov. 3 to 9 at the Tampa Convention Center in Tampa, Fla. The Opening Keynote, titled Then and Now What It Takes to Innovate, will offer attendees a historical overview of additive manufacturing as well as a look at trends that are shaping the future of the field, including the shift to make 3D production a reality, precision metals in industries such as aerospace and medical device manufacturing, and additive manufacturings pot ential impact on society through applications such as bio printing. The session will take place Monday, Nov. 6, from 800 a.m. to 945 a.m. Charles W. HullThe creator of sterolithography, the first commercial 3D printing technology, Hull originated the 3D printing industry when he founded 3D Systems in 1986, and remains a leader in the areas of precision healthcare and medical 3D printing, on-demand parts manufacturing and digital design tools. Introduced in 1987, 3D Systems SLA-1, the first commercial 3D printer, welches designated as an ASME Historic Mechanical Engineering Landmark in 2016. Before starting 3D Systems, Hull served as vice president of engineering at the systems manufacturing firm UVP Inc., engineering manager of the Photo Products Division at DuPont, and senior engineer at Bell Howell. ASME Past President J. Robert Sims (left) presented the ASME landmark plaque to Charles Hull of 3D Systems during the ASME landmark designation ceremony for the SLA-1 3D Printer l ast year in Rock Hill, S.C. (Photo courtesy of 3D Systems)The owner of 85 U.S. patents and numerous international patents in the fields of ion optics and 3D printing, Hull was inducted into the National Inventors Hall of Fame at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in 2014. He also received the Manufacturing Leadership Lifetime Achievement Award from Frost Sullivans Manufacturing Leadership Council in 2016, the European Patent Offices European Inventor Award in 2014, and The Economists Innovation Award in 2013.Hull, who earned a bachelors degree in engineering physics from the University of Colorado in 1961, received an honorary doctorate in engineering from Loughborough University in the United Kingdom in 2005 and an honorary doctorate in science from the University of Colorado in 2016.The Opening Keynote is just part of a IMECE 2017 program that includes mora than 450 technical sessions and 200 social and networking activities. For more information on the ASME 2017 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, or to register, visit www.asme.org/events/imece.