actualNoteContentPart: ## Expert's corner: escaping from the tyranny of urgency
  So far we've proposed a system that can help a user lift themselves out from a recency-based mindset. That's a great first step! The natural power-up goal is to become "more free," aka "less driven by urgent tasks." In an article called "[The Procrastination Matrix](https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/03/procrastination-matrix.html) ," Tim Urban ([waitbutwhy](https://waitbutwhy.com) ) proposes a simple method to interpret what should happen to important, urgent, and other tasks:
  > ![](https://images.amplenote.com/96c65ff2-98c1-11ea-8cbd-ba8f9d97df1f/bc2d3346-3042-4e6a-a021-7f226dec3049.png) The Eisenhower Matrix is a lens through which to choose prospective tasks
  Its staying power stems from simplicity and versatility. Its simplicity means anyone can judge whether a prospective task is urgent, important, neither, or both. Its versatility allows it to be applied to any career or pursuit. By applying the matrix over time, one gradually reduces the overall length of their list, while increasing the concentration of Q2 tasks. Practical freedom is setting goals and deciding when to work on them without being driven by urgent interruptions.
  
  Just how versatile is the matrix? Consider: we're working to convince you in 2020 to adopt an idea that's at least 70 years old (Dwight D. Eisenhower, popularly known as "Ike," was president in the 1950s). Ike's problems leading the United States through the red scare are a lot different than my problems balancing programming, writing, and exercise. No matter, the matrix helps calibrate priorities for either. As "foundational organizing principles" go, it's nice to have 70 years of real world vetting as the starting point.
  
  This is not to say that the classic Eisenhower Matrix is the perfect tool to organize your life. Far from it -- by default, the matrix is completely impractical. Its many shortcomings quickly become apparent when applied to the real world:
  
  **When "urgent" actually means "due today at 3pm."** Sometimes urgent tasks come with a due date. The ideal organizing system needs to understand when a due date is involved and elevate task visibility accordingly.
  
  **Should Q4 really be trashed?** Many tasks are neither urgent nor important, but still ought to get done if time allows (i.e., if it's quick). [A recent example]() .
  
  **What about task duration?** What is the cost of pursuing a prospective task? If we're talking 15 minutes to complete, that should probably get done today, even if it's neither urgent nor important. If it's 15 hours, that's different. 
  
  While the Eisenhower Matrix isn't fit for consumption out of the box, it's a well-tested prototype for identifying which of your tasks should rise or fall over time.
processedNoteContent: ---
  title: Classic to-do lists don't work
  headers: ## Expert's corner: escaping from the tyranny of urgency
  ---
  Expert's corner: escaping from the tyranny of urgency
  So far we've proposed a system that can help a user lift themselves out from a recency-based mindset. That's a great first step! The natural power-up goal is to become "more free," aka "less driven by urgent tasks." In an article called " [The Procrastination Matrix](https://waitbutwhy.com)`
   ," Tim Urban ( [waitbutwhy](https://waitbutwhy.com)`
   ) proposes a simple method to interpret what should happen to important, urgent, and other tasks:  The Eisenhower Matrix is a lens through which to choose prospective tasks
  Its staying power stems from simplicity and versatility. Its simplicity means anyone can judge whether a prospective task is urgent, important, neither, or both. Its versatility allows it to be applied to any career or pursuit. By applying the matrix over time, one gradually reduces the overall length of their list, while increasing the concentration of Q2 tasks. Practical freedom is setting goals and deciding when to work on them without being driven by urgent interruptions.
  Just how versatile is the matrix? Consider: we're working to convince you in 2020 to adopt an idea that's at least 70 years old (Dwight D. Eisenhower, popularly known as "Ike," was president in the 1950s). Ike's problems leading the United States through the red scare are a lot different than my problems balancing programming, writing, and exercise. No matter, the matrix helps calibrate priorities for either. As "foundational organizing principles" go, it's nice to have 70 years of real world vetting as the starting point. This is not to say that the classic Eisenhower Matrix is the perfect tool to organize your life. Far from it -- by default, the matrix is completely impractical. Its many shortcomings quickly become apparent when applied to the real world: When "urgent" actually means "due today at 3pm."
   Sometimes urgent tasks come with a due date. The ideal organizing system needs to understand when a due date is involved and elevate task visibility accordingly. Should Q4 really be trashed?
   Many tasks are neither urgent nor important, but still ought to get done if time allows (i.e., if it's quick). [A recent example]()
   . What about task duration?
   What is the cost of pursuing a prospective task? If we're talking 15 minutes to complete, that should probably get done today, even if it's neither urgent nor important. If it's 15 hours, that's different. While the Eisenhower Matrix isn't fit for consumption out of the box, it's a well-tested prototype for identifying which of your tasks should rise or fall over time.
noteTitle: Classic to-do lists don't work