Probably the most useful tool I've ever learned to tackle a structural group problem is to brainstorm all the things that could be done and then organize them in 'low effort / high effort', 'low impact / high impact'.

Then do the 'high impact / low effort' things first, followed by 'low impact / low effort'.
Use the energy and momentum from those small successes for the 'high impact / high effort' things and just skip the 'low impact high effort' pitfalls.

example in next post

Below is a simplified version of a plan I made with an affinity group that frequently had fights and 'drama'.

Note that these are things that would be high or low impact and high or low effort FOR US, based on our circumstances, characters and schedules. They will vary for others.

The most important thing to make this work is make sure you do not over-burden your group. Make sure you start with only about 2 things to do and make sure they're really 'low effort'. Then plan another 2, etc.

Show thread

@queeranarchism this seems a lot less stressful than the urgent/important grid my boss used to have us use

@rubah i worked someplace that did what @queeranarchism suggests, inside each quadrant of the einsenhower box (the urgent/important thing)

It was a pretty useful tool if used for big-picture planning, but people would use it to like, plan a meeting and well that is just too much planning.


Yeah, makes sense. The urgent/important boxes get used in a deadline-focused work setting.
Whereas the effort/impact gets used when maintaining energy and preventing burn out are prioritized.

@queeranarchism @rubah Sorry to hop in twice but where we used them, we phrased it as one deals with scarcity of time, and the other scarcity of labor.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Anarchism Space

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!