Deep Dive: One size does not fit all when it comes to habit formation
Goals vs. habits. Big vs. small. Plus: Adapting to your learning style and neurodiversity.
In December and January, much of the conversation on Optionality (and everywhere else I visited online), centered on goals. Or habits. Or intentions. Or words of the years. Whether you’re a devotee of SMART goals or BHAG goals (which I concede is like referencing ATM machines), you get the idea.
With so many different approaches to getting things done (or GTD as aficionados would call it), what do we really know about which approach works best? And how much does that depend on you, your brain and your learning style?
Trying to wrangle the information available on all of the above was made that much harder by seemingly contradictory information that is out there. The typical Google search results page I generated would include headlines trumpeting both “Impossible Goals Are Easier” and “To Achieve Big Goals, Start with Small Habits” in the top 5 results alone.
How are we to figure out what works for us amidst all these differing approaches and conflicting, yet all credible, advice?
Let’s look at some basic approaches, philosophies, and considerations:
Routines, habits, and the difference between them
This Harvard Business review article by Kristi DePaul rounds up some great sources on the topics of routines and habits…and how these are not interchangeable terms. Basically, a habit is something that is almost automatic, but in order to make something a habit you must include it in a routine. You may have heard me talk about habit-stacking, which attempts to codify the routines that can make desired behaviors become nearly-automatic habits. This approach has been evangelized in recent years by two leading authors on the subject, Charles Duhigg, author of The Power of Habit, and James Clear, the author of Atomic Habits. Having read both books, I can say they each left me with a different new approach to defining habit-creating routines.