For some, work will be consistent enough to not need major changes.You simply stick to the same system and you’ll get the results you want.
对有些人来说，工作始终如一，不需要太大的改变。你只需要坚持同一个系统，就会得到想要的结果。

For me, I’ve found that as what I’m trying to do changes dramatically, I often need very different approaches to work on things:
对我而言，随着我想做的事情发生巨大改变，我经常需要非常不同的方法来做事：

In college, I often relied on Weekly/Daily Goals.My work was mostly a set of fairly concrete and predictable tasks that needed to be finished to stay on top of things.
在大学里，我经常依靠每周/每日目标。我的工作大多是一系列非常具体、可预测的任务。掌控学业就需要完成这些。

During the MIT Challenge, the tasks themselves were larger and more ambiguous.My daily goals would have looked like, “Work on class problems all day.” Setting fixed working hours made more sense here, so I could focus when I needed to, but still give myself time to relax.
在MIT挑战期间，任务本身更庞大也更模糊，我的每天目标会是这样的:全天做课堂习题。在此设定固定的工作时间更合理，这样我就可以在需要的时候保持专注，但仍然给自己留有放松的时间。

During the Year Without English, I had core tasks I set hours for, just as with the MIT Challenge. But I also had dedicated habits for doing small tasks like flashcards or listening to podcasts outside of my normal working rhythms.This helped me capture spare moments in the day
在一年不说英语项目期间，就像MIT挑战一样，我有设定时间的核心任务，但也养成专门的习惯做一些小任务，例如在正常的工作节奏之外记识字卡或听播客，这帮助我抓住一天中的空闲时间。

When writing my book, deep work hours were essential.I still had other work, so I kept to-do lists for those.But setting aside the entire morning for research and writing meant I could get a lot done.Putting this first also kept me from procrastinating by using my other work as an excuse to keep from doing hard research/writing.
在写书的时候，深度工作时间是非常重要的。我还有其他工作，所以我为那些事保留了待做事项清单。 但留出整个早上进行研究和写作，意味着我可以完成很多工作。把这个放在第一位，也让我不至于以其他工作为借口来拖延，不做困难的研究/写作。

When I had to promote my book, my daily schedule looked like Swiss cheese, with up to five podcasts per day.A calendar-driven approach, where I scheduled my tasks made more sense here otherwise it would be hard to decide when was the best time to work on things.
当我不得不推广新书时，我每天的日程表就像蜂窝乳酪一样，一天最多有五个播客。用日历驱动的办法来安排我的任务在此更有意义，否则很难决定什么时候是处理事情的最佳时间。

Some features of my system rarely change.I almost always have a calendar and daily to-do list, for instance.But adjusting to a new system when I have different types of projects has been more successful for me than stubbornly trying to fit everything into a single system.
我的系统中有些功能很少改变。例如，我几乎总会有一个日历和每日待办事项列表。但是当我有不同类型的项目要做时，调整到新的系统对我而言要比顽固地试图把所有事情都装进一个系统更成功。

Rule #6 - Always measure against your baseline(not somebody else’s)
准则六：总是相对于你的基线（而不是其他人的）衡量


If you’re ever evaluating a productivity system, the right measurement to make is “am I getting more done than I was a week/month/year ago?” If you’re, instead, asking yourself, “how close am I to being perfectly productive?” or worse, “how productive am I compared to so-and-so?” you’re going to have a bad time.
如果你曾经评估一个生产力系统，正确的测量标准应该是“我有比一周/一月/一年前完成更多事吗？”但如果你问自己：“我距离完美的高效还有多远？”或更糟糕地，“与某某相比，我的生产如何？”你会过得很糟糕。

The tyranny of ideal productivity is a major problem.I’ve worked with students in my courses whom set up a project successfully and were making consistent progress towards it.When I asked them how they’re doing, however, they complained that they still didn’t think they’re productive enough.
理想生产力的苛政是个大问题。我在课上曾与一些学生合作，他们成功地开始一个项目，而且不断朝着目标取得进展。可是当我问他们做得怎么样时，他们抱怨说，仍然觉得自己生产力不够。

But how much is enough?
但多少才够呢？

There’s certainly being insufficiently productive for your current goals or environment.If I were falling behind in my classes or failing to reach my deadlines, that might be cause be cause for reflection.
显然存在对你当前的目标或环境来说不够高效的情况。如果我的课业落后或没能在最后期限前完成，那可能是值得反思的。

On the other hand, there’s a perverse tendency to judge yourself against some ideal benchmark.Comparing yourself against a theoretical possibility, rather than your own past results.If you get more done than you were getting done before, the system is successful.That you’re not able to work for sixteen hours without break cannot be viewed as a failure.
另一方面，也存在一种不合理的倾向，即根据一些理想的基准来评判自己。与某种理论上的可行性–而不是你自己过去的结果–相比较。如果你完成的工作比以前多，系统就是成功的。你无法十六个小时不停歇地工作不能被看成一种失败。

Rule #7 - A system cannot give your work meaning or motivation
准则七：系统无法给予你工作的意义或动机


A system can only shape and direct the motivations you already have, it cannot give you ones you don’t already possess.
系统只能塑造和引导你已经拥有的动机，而无法给你那些你还不具备的动力。

Work that feels miserable to you doesn’t magically become exciting with the right productivity system.At best, it becomes an endurable chore.
让你觉得痛苦的工作不会因为有了正确的生产力系统就神奇地变得令人兴奋。最多，它只能变成一种勉强能够忍受的苦差事。

Many failures of productivity are, at their root, deeper problems of meaning and mission in life.If you’re spending your days at a job you hate, if you’re studying a major you were coerced into rather than freely chose, if your dream job has become a nightmare, then no productivity system can fix this.
没有生产力，很多时候在根源上是生活的意义与目标的深层问题。如果你每天都在从事一份你讨厌的工作，如果你在学习一个被迫学习而不是自由选择的专业，如果你梦想的工作已经成为噩梦，我那么没有生产力系统可以解决这个问题.

Productivity systems work better the more natural enthusiasm you have. They work like a lens, magnifying and directing the diffuse energy you already possess. The people, therefore, that tend to succeed with productivity systems already have a meaning and drive for their work.They have ambitions and recognize that getting things done efficiently is necessary for reaching them.
你拥有越多自然的热情，生产力系统的效果就越好。它们就像透镜一样工作，将你已经拥有的散射的能量放大和引导。因此，容易成功运用生产力系统的人，已经找到了他们工作的意义和动力。他们心怀雄心壮志，并且意识到高效完成工作是实现雄心的必要条件。