delegate and test (and say "fuck, yeah!")

If there is a core truth universally acknowledged, it is that when people want something they make it happen. I believe this is true in careers, dating, material possessions, experiences, whatever. We will go to great lengths, usually, to make things that we want to happen, happen.

Image from https://www.flickr.com/photos/gamerscore/2457102497/

This also mean the opposite is true - when someone is dragging their feet not finishing something, or not calling you back, or not saving the money they say they want to save, or not cleaning their bathroom for the five millionth time (ahem, that might be a personal example), it's because* they just don't really want to. Sure, we're all busy. But the last time you had something to do that you felt really passionate about or engaged by, or the last time you really wanted something or someone, I bet you figured out a way to try to make it happen.

One of my colleagues has a process for new tasks that I like to call "Delegate and Test." It goes a little bit like this:

Let's say my colleague does a talk at a conference. Someone comes up to him after his talk and says "That was an excellent talk! I'd love to read the Smith, 2015 reference that you referred to. Is there any chance you can email it to me?"

And his reply always is: "Sure, send me an email about it."

Or someone might say "I think you would be a really great committee member on the Committee of Neverending Tasks. Any chance you would be interested?"

And his reply is: "Send me an email about it."

80% of the time, according to my colleague, he never hears from the person again. He delegates the work of initiation back to them ("Sure, send me an email") and then tests whether or not they are really interested (Do they ever send the email?). Because people only generally do things they really want to do, this allows him to discern who is serious and who is not.

The second thing I've learned from this colleague is that while it is really easy to start things ("I'd love to be on your Terrible Committee!"), it is much, much more difficult to end them. How many terrible tasks that you signed yourself up for have you walked away from? My guess is not that many. Or if you did, you felt guilty as shit, like I do.

We all have lots of things we could be doing with our time as academics (whatever stage you're at). Some of those things are requirements if you want to meet certain goals. For example, if you want to graduate you have to finish your dissertation. If you want to land a tenure-track job you should be publishing. If you want to get tenure you should be publishing (okay if you want to do most things in academia you should be publishing...). When trying to decide about those things that fall into the category of Shit I Should Do, I try to ask myself: "What is in my best interests?"

Is it in my best interests to join another committee? Is it in my best interests to sign up for a collaboration when I'm not sure the other person is invested? To go to the main conference in my field just because I have been going for years? To work until 3am? To take time off?

There are no right or wrong answers to those questions - and "shoulds" set up the idea that some answers are right (doing the thing) and some answers are wrong (not doing the thing). The reality is that everyone's interests are completely different, so everyone's time should be spent differently.

Related, the third thing I've learned from this colleague is that in the sea of potential ways we could be spending our time as academics, you should try to only do the things that make you say "Fuck, yeah!" when you're asked to do them. (Disclaimer: I have increased the color in his language...). Life is short, work is busy - why bother with things that you aren't excited about?

*Okay this is a little oversimplified, but at its heart I believe it is true, and oversimplified stories make better blog stories