Hank Pym is correct; we are talking semantics. Is balance multitasking, or is it
equilibrium? Without the latter, we'd be stumbling all over the place.I know and use the urgency/importance matrix. But other factors enter in. For
example, what one person considers to be very urgent and very important may be
not urgent and not important for a spouse, a boss, a child. I believe it's
correct usage of the term to say we must balance our priorities with those of
others. Other factors may also influence how we "balance our priorities"
(which I also believe is correct usage of the term.) Those may include time
available, financial considerations, and as Hank mentioned, location. The list
goes on.I fail to see any logic in setting up a conflicted definition
between the two terms: priority and balance. To me, they're like the old
refrain "Love and Marriage...can't have one without the other." Now
there's a subject that definitely IS controversial!
"Despite his many responsibilities, Moll says he doesn't believe in
balance. Instead, he builds his busy schedule around priorities."This just doesn't make sense to me. Doesn't believe in balance?Yes, I understand priorities and prioritizing things but don't you
still have to balance your priorities? You still need to balance things at
times or you may end up too focused on one thing and something else becomes out
Nothing personal ... but YAWN.
Good for you for finding that niche to make it work for you and your family. A
lot of people are not as fortunate as you but I'm sure they are trying
their best to find balance within their priorities.
Jesus gave us the model in our lives for balance and priorities:"But
seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things
shall be added unto you." (Matthew 6:33, see verses 24-34)In a
culture saturated with self-aggrandizement, selfish ambition, "success"
being defined with dollar signs and percentages, and a "progress at any
cost" mentality, we must be very careful not to forget that we are spiritual
beings having a temporal experience. The purpose of this life is to serve Christ
and to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. There are eternal
things at stake. Life is balanced when we remember this priority.God
gave us this time to develop and grow and to help others do so. "Behold the
lilies of the field..." If we never take time to behold them because
we're too busy "succeeding", we miss the point. Spending 4 hours
with a widow is the right thing to do, even if it does nothing for home teaching
percentages. Jesus' heart is tender for "the least of these". God
desires us to delight in life, and to love one another as He has loved us.
Hank Pym,Fine, you don't like the word "balance", I get
it. lolHere's a better way to put it:Model 1:A, B, C, D, E, F, GModel 2:ABCDEFGModel 3ABCDEFGIs
balance required for each? Yes. Of course. But the word "balance" here
is referring to multi-tasking as opposed to prioritizing in a linear model. For
me personally, it's easier to work on one thing at a time. I get more done
that way. I work faster. I also miss some things sometimes, but life moves on.
I'm comfortable saying "sorry, that wasn't as important as another
task".We can use words like iteration, linear, and sequential.
But most people don't see it that way. Balancing vs Prioritizing makes
sense to a larger audience.I'll do 1 thing at a time and
prioritize what I do first. I find that faster and easier to work in and
maintain a healthy attitude. When I try to balance multiple things at the same
time, I work slower and I'm more easily distracted and ultimately
frustrated. Simpler is better.
How about running a story of someone disadvantaged and the day-to-day struggles
they face? Or an article explaining the immigration system?
For what it's worth, when I'm at a conference or at work, my family is
still my top priority. And I agree with @HankPym, prioritizing importance with
allocated time is the definition of balance.
to cjb & know itPriorities/workload are not exclusively dealing
with time but where you are i.e. Location. Did I just reiterate my initial
theory? My theory confirms what the articles protagonist is saying in a
roundabout way.FWIW... The best examples I have of "project
management" are my brothers dogs; Do 1 thing, give it 100%, & move on.
@JimmyBoy: Oh, we have plenty of struggles like any other family. For example,
watch the video included in the article if you haven't. I mention a pretty
sizable mistake (i.e. typo) that about did me in professionally. Another
example: search "cameron moll type 1 diabetes" to read about our
family's challenges of having a son with Type 1 diabetes.
Good article and video about a bright, talented man and how he lives his life. I
love his involvement with his sons. A follow-on article about his wife would
really be interesting. She must be a remarkable woman who handles all of the
day-to-day things in family life that seems to be centered around him. How does
she do it? What happens in that household to nurture her? The boys are learning
how to be successful at a very young age. But what are they learning about women
and how to treat them? Just wondering....
It's nice to see yet another LDS career success story but what about
authentic messaging that our leaders tell us about? It would be nice to see the
challenges that this family goes through and not just the good times (playing
on their soccer field in their backyard, making apps together, smiling,
laughing, etc.) What about the struggles that this family faces as well? After
all life is not just a bed of roses.
Hank Pym,For me there is a very clear mental difference.Option 1 - Treat it like a weight scale with two plates. You can try to find
equal time for different things. Or rather like a juggler trying to distribute
load. The problem is that juggling life that way isn't very effective for
most anyone really.Option 2 - I have 10 tasks that need to be done
this week. I'll set these 7 aside as they are less important. Perhaps
urgent, but less important. I have 3 which I can't afford not to take care
of. They may be less immediately demanding, but because they are more important
I deal with those first. Once taken care of, I then grab 2 more from the pile
and start working through them until they are done.Yes, you could
say that either are ultimately a form of balancing. But 'prioritizing'
better describes my second example and 'balance' better describes the
first. Do one thing at a time, and do what's most important first.
It's not a multi-tasking game, it's a game of order, or rather doing
things in a certain order.
re Hank Pym It results in a balance, the path to that balance is
different than if one focused on balance. This is yet one different approach
that is worth at least knowing about.
Moll is right. Setting priorities allows one to focus intensely, completely
lacking balance, for the extended periods of time required to achieve great
things. There are very few people who are reach excellence in their given
field, and almost none of them lead "balanced" lives. This, of course,
has costs, sometimes enormous costs, and is only worth the cost to a few. Thus
mediocrity is common.
Call it semantics but... shifting priorities depending on location is balance.