How A Coffee Pot Jarred My Thinking About Productivity

Posted on August 31, 2011 by LJ Earnest
Categories: Productivity,Simplification

• Tweet
• Email

• Tweet
• Email

Wednesdays are simplicity days at SimpleProductivity blog.

Last week my coffee pot stopped working. It refused to recognize that there was water in the chamber, and would not turn on. Half asleep, I stewed about this as I brewed my coffee using my standby – a single cup cone filter. This coffee machine was a rather expensive Krups, just beyond the warranty expiration. I had bought the machine because my cheap coffee pot gave up after five years, and better name machines are supposed to last, right?

Grumpy from the lack of caffeine, I vowed, “I will never buy another Krups. Why waste the money!”

Paying For Features

It wasn’t until later that I realized that my initial purchase had wasted a lot of money because the I paid for features I never used.

All I really need in a coffee pot is the ability to brew coffee. The only other features I used on the Krups was the timed brew and the auto-off. Basically the features that made it possible for me to not have to push a button to start it, nor remember to turn it off; both functions of the electricity. And both features I could accomplish with an appliance timer.

So now I own a Mr. Coffee with a physical (non-electronic) switch, and it’s plugged into an appliance timer. Total cost for the setup was 1/4 the Krups cost, and provides me with everything I want.

Targets of Marketing

We are often targeted to think we need more than we actually do. After all, isn’t that the whole point of marketing? But when we step back, how many of those features will we use?

I remember when I was buying my car, the salesman was trying hard to get me to buy the one with the heated seats. Which, had I still lived on the frozen tundra, would have been nice. But not needed here, where the temps rarely go below 40 (F).

Same goes for just about any purchase we make today, from electronics to clothing to “do you want to super size that?”

How This Applies to Productivity

I’ve gone back to paper temporarily, partially because the foobahs and whatzits of the software and systems were taking my attention.

Example: many productivity systems use the concept of “context”, or tasks that can be done where you are. The thought behind that is you are out running errands, and you have your whole list. This might be great for some people, but not for me. I am pretty much at home, at work, or running errands. I always have a phone at my disposal, and a notebook to write. So pretty much all my contexts are everywhere. Many software packages advertise this as a major feature, but it’s not one I would use. So why pay for it with dealing with the interface? Why have to put in a context if I will never use it?

The thing is that so many parts of our productivity strategies have gotten feature bloat, and we just accept that we need to use all the features, because someone declared them innovative. Think about it.

There are many ways that things have gotten unnecessarily complex. Do you have any examples? Share below.

Photo by dougww

---

If you enjoyed this post, please buy me a cup of coffee!