Introducing the “Productivity Hobbyist” Genre
First time here? I hope you'll consider subscribing via rss or email (it's free). Thanks for visiting!
Clay
Hobbyist: A person who pursues an activity in their spare time for pleasure.
-Dictionary.com
Yesterday, six headlines (of 17) appeared in the filtered “top stories” section of the most referenced productivity blog on the Internet. Here they are:
- "Get the Most from Your Rechargeable Batteries [Saving Money]"
- "Five Quick Searches That Turn Firefox’s Address Bar into a Network Command Line [Firefox]"
- "Coolest Cubicle Contest: The Final Showdown and Monster Roundup"
- "How the Kindle Saves You Time (If Not Money) [Ebooks]"
- "Embed Your To-Do List Onto Your Desktop [Lifehacker Book Contest Winner]"
- "IM App Digsby Available to All, Adds More Features [Featured Windows Download]"
These headlines the headlines of a hobbyist publication. A quality hobbyist publication that presents its content with brio and skill, but a hobbyist publication nonetheless. Indeed, if blogs like Lifehacker were magazines in Barns and Noble, they’d be displayed next to Popular Science and Pen Computing Magazine, not Healthy Living, Psychology Today, or O, The Oprah Magazine. Right?
Don’t get me wrong: I truly have nothing against Lifehacker and its ilk (I’m a subscriber, afterall), and Lifehacker does have non-hobbyist articles that engender productivity. It should also be noted that hobbies are great things, and having fun is (in my opinion) a lot more important than being productive.
Still, I think it’s important to differentiate between the productivity habit and the productivity hobby.
The “Hobbyist Productivity” Genre
Hobby: an activity or interest pursued for pleasure or relaxation and not as a main occupation: Her hobbies include stamp-collecting and woodcarving.
-Dictionary.com
Quick story: I overheard two guys conversing the other day at the gym. They spent about 45 minutes enthusiastically talking about powerlifting competitions and cited books, magazine articles, studies, etc. They were enjoying themselves. But they weren’t working out, and when it comes to return on investment for their time, these guys probably lapped the point of diminishing return a long time ago.
But other positive things were transpiring. These guys were forming a connection, exchanging good will, and perhaps deepening a friendship. And maybe it’s these kinds of conversations that get them to come to the gym in the first place. Cool.
But in the same manner that my listening to that nuanced gym conversation probably won’t make me much stronger (I just need to work out more often), reading works of the hobbyist productivity genre probably won’t make me significantly more productive, either.
But what is the hobbyist productivity genre?
An article or book belongs in the hobbyist productivity genre when…
- Its (1) about productivity, (2) you have absolutely no clue what it’s saying, and (3) it hits the front page of Digg;
- The words “hack,” “tip,” “tweak,” and “trick” are used in the same paragraph;
- Its advocating productivity for productivity’s sake;
- Its focus is on sexy means rather than effective ends;
- It’s a blog post that features more than 5 firefox plugins;
- The article focuses excessively on implementation and doesn’t mention outcomes;
- The acronym GTD appears in the article but the phrase “Getting Things Done” does not (this applies to any of the productivity acronyms, including 4HWW);
- An article is titled “Introducing the ‘Hobbyist Productivity’ Genre.”
The Take Home Message: Be a Conscious Consumer
It appears that a lot of people consume hobbyist productivity materials for the same reasons that they buy an expensive personal digital assistant when a good ol’ paper planner would’ve done a better job. That is, they do these things because they elicit the often illusory feelings of being productive.
One lesson that has hit home recently is this: you can get mired in bible verses without being a Christian, you can watch The Biggest Loser while putting on weight, and you can consume loads of information without gaining knowledge.
It’s also possible to practice the productivity hobby without developing the productivity habit. The former isn’t bad, but it’s important to remain cognizant of the hobby/habit distinction.
Note: For another alternative perspective on productivity, see this great post by Lisa Gates, entitled The Trouble with Productivity.
Skellie said,
Wrote on March 21, 2008 @ 7:15 am
Clay, this post demonstrates every reason why I am so proud to advertise you on Anywired.
Clay Collins said,
Wrote on March 21, 2008 @ 10:15 am
@Skellie:Awww…. shucks, Skellie. Thank you.
Hunter Nuttall said,
Wrote on March 21, 2008 @ 11:47 am
Clay, this is a very interesting way of thinking about it. It helps me better understand why people are so obsessed with blogs like LifeHacker, which I couldn’t manage to get into.
@Stephen | Productivity in Context said,
Wrote on March 21, 2008 @ 2:32 pm
There has been a bit of a backlash against productivity lately, and you have hit the nail on the head. Hacking/tweaking/customizing your Productivity tools for its own sake is a booming industry.
My personal Productivity Gospel is that being productive is about getting to “Done”, so that you have the time to do what you want to do. It is not about endlessly refining your system.
ReddyK - The Atma Jyoti Blog said,
Wrote on March 21, 2008 @ 5:48 pm
Clay,
I noticed a tiny happy face above the RSS subscription section of your blog. Is this some sort of insidious, subliminal effort to induce me to subscribe to your feed? Hah! Well, it won’t work, because I subscribed a while back. ;-)
As always, I enjoy your postings, even when they are on a subject which doesn’t interest me, because the writing is entertaining.
Clay Collins said,
Wrote on March 21, 2008 @ 6:34 pm
@Hunter: Yeah, it becomes a hobby like stamp collecting, model train building, etc. People get obsessed. The ultimate goal isn’t productivity, really, it’s getting into something deeply. I never could get into LifeHacker either, although the title is nice. Thanks for the comment.
Clay Collins said,
Wrote on March 21, 2008 @ 6:36 pm
@ReaddyK: Thanks ReddyK. You know what they say, if you can’t get people with substance, then try and get them with style :-). I really enjoy the substance of your blog. A lot. Even though I don’t always understand some of the references.
Clay Collins said,
Wrote on March 21, 2008 @ 6:38 pm
@Stephen: You wrote somewhere that for you, productivity isn’t about getting things done, it’s about being done. I like that a lot. It’s an honor to have someone as knowledge about productivity as you stopping by and commenting on this article.
Lisa Gates said,
Wrote on March 21, 2008 @ 9:20 pm
Great mind, great distinctions. I’d reference the post you thanked me for as fodder, but I need a hack to remember me how to do it without taking up 10 acres of your real estate.
(Thanks for mentioning John Hiatt, BTW, another mark in your favor. Just promise you’ll never make it to the three-martini lunch.)
Clay Collins said,
Wrote on March 21, 2008 @ 11:08 pm
@Lisa: I’ve linked to your post at the bottom of this article.
@Everyone: Lisa’s post got me thinking about this topic and jump-started the writing of this article.
caron said,
Wrote on March 22, 2008 @ 9:14 am
wow, another great deconstruction meta post, clay.
Andy C said,
Wrote on March 23, 2008 @ 12:47 pm
Thanks for the pic usage. Makes me laugh still. Your concern and observations are a common one in most any field. You can talk about working or you can work. As social creatures we like to relate. Thus at a gym to other gym rats (and I’ve been one), a mechanic to mechanic, a chef to chef, a productivity person to other productivity people. We have a good time sharing and relating our worlds so we can better know, and be known, by others.
Of course like you say you can get mired in the details and maybe little of it will actually convert into a usable form but don’t doubt the subconscious ability to absorb and integrate without us always paying attention. A good and bad thing for sure.
The neat thing is life’s subtleties. The longer you do something the more granular you find it the more intricate the steps become the more nuances are shown, on and on like a fractal. Sometimes you get lost in there, it’s when we feel most lost yet have the most information then remember core competencies and simplify to basics. Basics which somehow seem stronger for the journey, and then when you take the journey again (and you will, if you are a person of growth), you learn even more of the behaviors. The one ongoing thing I love about learning and life is you are definitely never through with new permutations.
-a
Clay Collins said,
Wrote on March 23, 2008 @ 5:07 pm
@Andy: I like your fractal analogy; you are a great writer and I’m grateful that you added this beautiful comment.
Clay Collins said,
Wrote on March 23, 2008 @ 5:12 pm
@Caron: thanks! I had a lot of fun writing it.
Ali Hale said,
Wrote on March 24, 2008 @ 7:13 am
Great points, you’ve managed to put your finger on something that’s been subtly bothering me about the whole “genre” of productivity-blogging out there. I think people need to distinguish between productivity as a means to an end, and productivity as an interest/hobby in itself — a bit like the difference between pursuing finanicial gain purely to enjoy a richer overall lifestyle, or pursuing financial gain due to a fascination with money, markets, and so on.
Ali
Paul Montwill | Sharingmatters.com said,
Wrote on March 25, 2008 @ 5:09 am
I thought about it many times. That is why I put some simple rules for INPUT/OUTPUT. INPUT - I read maximum 5-6 blog posts a day and has just reduced my Google Reader list (Clay, your blog is still on the list because your writing is unique - no “7 ways to do something” articles). OUTPUT - I keep my TO DO list busy and concentrate on HITTING GOALS not DOING THINGS. As reading cool blogs is very pleasant, seeing results of your hard work sounds better for me.