Planning Is Equivalent to Explaining the Importance

¶ … planning is equivalent to explaining the importance of time management. Stack (2000) argues that every minute spent in planning translates into 10 additional minutes for execution that are gained. 10 minutes a planning will translate into 100 additional minutes, which is 1 hour and 40 minutes. I always find how important planning is at work. I always start my day with a shortlist of the most important things that I need to get done through the day. This shortlist helps me prioritize as well, because only the essential things will go on the list.

By the end of the day, completing the list means getting the most important things done, a good feeling about a day at work. "The world as we have created it is a process of our thinking.

It cannot be changed without changing our thinking." (Einstein) and "Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself." (Tolstoi) are two good quotes to start a discussion about dealing with change and the main idea is that individuals always need to deal with change themselves before dealing with change in a wider context. I moved to Japan for several years some time back. There were changes and challenges for everyone involved, including the family.

My initial approach was to monitor their change processes and ensure that everything was going well. I then realized that I had to handle my own change process before helping them with theirs, because that would make things easier for everyone involved. It is like in the plane, where you first need to put your own mask on before putting the mask on your child's face. So, I started going to Japanese events, immersing myself in the Japanese culture and making sure I took in as much as possible.

It was then easier for me to take my children and the rest of the family to Japanese shows, explain to them things, help them in a more effective manner. 4.

It is believed that one of the reasons that Napoleon lost the Battle of Waterloo (the other being, of course, the fact that he had the entire of Europe against him and that he had already gone through generations of French soldiers, with little recruiting base left) was the lack of effective communication (which, by a logical correlation, will come to show that, with effective communication, he could have at least won that battle).

Marshal Soult, one of his best marshals, had taken over as his Chief of Staff, an essential position that virtually coordinated all messages and orders for the troops that came out of Napoleon's mind. He had replaced Marshal Berthier, who had served in that position for many years, performing in an excellent manner. Marshal Soult sent a message to Grouchy to join the rest of the army for the battle that was undertaken at Waterloo, but Grouchy did not believe the news and did nothing.

When Napoleon asked Soult how many messengers he had sent, Soult said only one. Napoleon replied: "One, one?! For something of this importance, Berthier would have sent ten." There are several things that this story tells us, but the most important one is how essential effective communication.