I used to be a productivity junkie. My browser bookmarks overflowed with efficiency articles. My phone was packed with time-tracking apps. I had color-coded calendars with blocks as small as 15 minutes. I read all the books, followed all the gurus, and implemented all the systems.
And I was completely burned out.
The irony wasn’t lost on me: all this optimization was making me less productive, not more. Something had to change. That’s when I began experimenting with what I now call my “anti-productivity system” – an approach that paradoxically helped me accomplish more by focusing less on efficiency.
Most productivity systems share a common assumption: that time is a resource to be maximized, that more output equals success, and that efficiency is the ultimate goal. These systems treat humans like machines that simply need better programming.
But here’s the truth I discovered: humans aren’t machines. We’re organic beings with fluctuating energy levels, complex emotions, and a need for meaning beyond mere output.
The constant pressure to optimize created three major problems in my life:
My new approach didn’t happen overnight. Through months of experimentation, I developed five core principles that now guide my work and life:
Time is fixed, but energy fluctuates. Instead of asking, “How can I fit more into my day?” I began asking, “When am I at my best for different types of tasks?”
I tracked my energy for two weeks and discovered I have peak creative energy in the morning, strong analytical capacity after lunch, and almost no capacity for either after 4 PM. Now I schedule tasks to match these energy patterns rather than trying to force focus when it’s not naturally available.
Some inefficiency is actually valuable. Taking the scenic route home might seem inefficient, but if it helps me decompress and transition between work and home, it’s actually an investment in my evening’s quality.
I now deliberately build “inefficiencies” into my day – like walking to get lunch instead of ordering delivery, or taking five minutes to chat with a colleague rather than sending a quick email. These moments create space for insight and connection that hyperefficiency eliminates.
Not all procrastination is equal. When I avoid one task by doing another valuable task, that’s productive procrastination. Instead of forcing myself to tackle projects in a predetermined order, I now keep a diverse task list and follow my natural inclinations within boundaries.
Allowing this flexibility means I’m almost always working on something I have energy for, rather than dragging myself through tasks when my heart isn’t in it.
In my old system, rest was what happened when all the tasks were complete (spoiler: they never were). Now, rest is a non-negotiable part of my schedule – built in before I feel depleted.
I’ve found that short breaks throughout the day, one longer midday pause, and at least one full day off per week dramatically increases my overall output, even though I’m “working” fewer hours.
I’ve abandoned quantitative metrics like tasks completed or hours worked in favor of qualitative questions:
Six months into my anti-productivity system, the results have been surprising:
Most importantly, I’ve broken free from the cycle of optimization that paradoxically made me less effective. By acknowledging my humanity and working with my natural rhythms rather than against them, I’ve found a sustainable way to contribute my best work.
If you’re feeling trapped on the productivity hamster wheel, consider experimenting with your own version of anti-productivity:
Remember, the goal isn’t to get more done—it’s to get the right things done in a way that sustains rather than depletes you.