We’re all too busy, spending our days in back-to-back meetings and our nights feverishly responding to emails. (Adam Grant, a famously responsive Wharton professor, told me that on an “average day” he’ll spend 3-4 hours answering messages.) That’s why people who waste our time have become the scourge of modern business life, hampering our productivity and annoying us in the process.

　　Sometimes it’s hard to escape, especially when the time-waster is your boss (one friend recalls a supervisor who “called meetings just to tell long, rambling stories about her college years” and would “chastise anyone who tried to leave and actually perform work”). But in many other situations, you can take steps to regain control of your time and your schedule. Here’s how.

　　白天要開一個接一個的會議，晚上則是狂熱地回郵件，我們都太忙了。(Adam Grant是一位能夠及時回復(fù)的沃頓商學(xué)院教授，他告訴我，他“平均每天”要花上3到4個小時回應(yīng)信息。)這就是為何浪費我們時間的人，如今已經(jīng)成為現(xiàn)代商業(yè)生活的害群之馬，既妨礙了我們的生產(chǎn)力，也讓我們在此過程中備受其擾。

　　有時，這實在難以避免，尤其是當(dāng)浪費你時間的人是你老板的時候(我的一位朋友想起了一名主管，他“召集大家開會，僅僅是為了講他大學(xué)時期的那些又長又雜亂的故事”，而且他會“責(zé)罵那些想要試圖離開去認(rèn)真工作的人”)。但在其他很多情況下，你能夠采取措施，重新掌控你自己的時間和日程。你可以這樣做：

　　State your preferred method of communication. For years, millennials have famously eschewed phone calls — but almost everyone has a communication preference of some sort. Regina Walton, a social media and community manager, told me that she, too, hates talking on the phone, a habit she developed after years of living abroad; email is almost always better for her, as “I can respond when I have time and usually am very fast to reply.” You can often limit aggravation (and harassment via multiple channels) by proactively informing colleagues about the best way to reach you, whether it’s via phone calls, texts, emails, or even tweets.

　　Require an agenda for meetings. Pointless or rambling meetings account for a disproportionate share of workplace time leakage. Here’s a solution: insist on seeing an agenda before you commit to attending any meeting, “to ensure I can contribute fully.” You can model the practice by writing an agenda for any meetings you chair, and offering to share the template with others. In fact, you could push to establish company norms that include best practices such as eliminating generic “updates” (which can usually be emailed in advance) and clearly indicating the decisions that need to be made as a result of the meeting. “Discuss expansion strategy” would be a murky and perhaps unproductive agenda item; “Decide whether to open a Tampa office” can guide the conversation much more clearly.

　　明確你更喜歡的溝通方式。多年來，千禧一代是公認(rèn)的不愛接打電話，但幾乎所有人都有某一種更偏好的溝通渠道。Regina Walton(一位社交媒體與社區(qū)經(jīng)理)告訴我，她也同樣討厭在電話里交談，這一習(xí)慣源于她多年的海外生活經(jīng)歷。對她來說，電子郵件無疑總是更好，因為“我能夠在有時間的時候回復(fù)它們，而且我的回復(fù)速度通常很快。”你能夠通過主動地告訴同事聯(lián)系你的最佳方式，來減少傷腦筋的情況(以及多種渠道所導(dǎo)致的煩擾)，無論這一方式是電話、信息、電子郵件還是推特。

　　要求一份會議議程。不得要領(lǐng)或是散漫的會議占據(jù)了很大一部分的工作時間浪費。解決方式如下：在確認(rèn)參加任何會議之前，堅持先看議程，“以確保我能夠全心投入”。你能夠通過為你所主持的會議寫好議程，以及主動與他人共享這一模式來進行實踐。實際上，你能夠推動公司常規(guī)的建立，讓這些常規(guī)包括最佳的實踐方法，比如說去掉一般的“更新內(nèi)容”(這些內(nèi)容往往能夠通過電郵提前通知)和清楚地表明在會議最終要做出的決定。“討論擴張戰(zhàn)略”可能會是一個模糊、甚至無成果的議程條目;“決定是否在坦帕新開一個辦事處”則能夠更加清晰地引導(dǎo)對話。

　　Police guest lists. Meetings are also dangerous when their list of invitees has been wantonly constructed, filled with irrelevant people and lacking decisionmakers with the authority to get things moving. If you’ve been invited, ask two critical questions. First, do I need to be there? Looking at the agenda (which you’ve insisted they provide), you can gauge whether your input would be valuable or if you can just find out details afterwards. Second, will the (other) right people be there? If you’re theoretically deciding on the Tampa expansion strategy and the executive in charge of Southeast operations isn’t in the room, it’s likely you’ll have to repeat the whole process again for her benefit. Make sure you understand who the real decisionmakers are, and don’t waste your time (or other people’s) until they can be present and participate.

　　Force others to prepare. We all hope and expect that others will prepare for meetings with us. Surprisingly often, they don’t. Even when they’re requesting the meeting, they may have done very little research and waste our time with extremely basic questions they could have Googled. Instead, we need to force others to prepare in advance. “Force” is a harsh word, and that’s intentional ­— because it’s not burdensome for people who would have prepared anyway, yet it effectively weeds out the uncommitted. Debbie Horovitch, a specialist in Google+ Hangouts, has long offered complimentary initial strategy sessions, but realized that some people were taking advantage with irrelevant discussions.

　　認(rèn)真關(guān)注與會人員名單。當(dāng)被邀請人的名單是隨意擬定，充斥著不相關(guān)的人、卻又缺少擁有足夠權(quán)限的決策者來推動進程的時候，這種會議是很危險的。如果你被邀請了，問問兩個關(guān)鍵性問題。首先，我需要來這兒嗎?看看議程(這一你堅持讓他們提供的東西)，你就能夠估計你的參與是否具有價值或是你能否在事后確定細(xì)節(jié)。其次，其他合適的人會參加嗎?假設(shè)你們正在對坦帕的擴張戰(zhàn)略做出決定，而管理東南地區(qū)運營的主管卻并不在，那為她著想，你很可能必須向她重復(fù)整個流程。確保你知道真正的決策者是誰，如果他們不能夠到場并參加會議，那就別浪費你自己(或是其他人)的時間了。

　　強制他人提前做好準(zhǔn)備。我們都希望并且預(yù)期別人會和我們一起為會議做準(zhǔn)備。但往往出人意料的是，他們并不會這么做。即便是他們自己要求開會，他們也可能只做了非常少的研究，并且以那些在網(wǎng)上搜索就能夠得到答案的、極其基礎(chǔ)的問題來浪費我們的時間。因此比起放任自流，我們必須強制別人提前做準(zhǔn)備。“強制”是一個聽起來很刺耳的詞，而選擇這個詞是故意的，因為對于總是會提前準(zhǔn)備的人而言，這算不上負(fù)擔(dān)，但它能夠有效地淘汰那些不負(fù)責(zé)任的人。Debbie Horovitch(Google+視頻群聊項目的專家)，一直有提供免費的初始型戰(zhàn)略會議，但卻發(fā)現(xiàn)有些人利用其進行無關(guān)的討論。

　　She’s adopted a new policy: “Everyone who wants a call/chat with me must fill in an application” with specific questions about what will be discussed. “Now that I’ve set my boundaries and expectations of the people I work with, it’s much easier to identify the time wasters.” Similarly, when people request informational interviews with me, I’ve begun sending them a document with links to articles I’ve written about their area of interest (becoming a consultant or speaker, reinventing their careers, etc.) and asking them to get back in touch after they’ve read them to see what questions they still have. Most never get back to me, which is just as well ­— I only want to speak with people who are interested and committed.

　　Will you face blow-back by toughening up and putting clear boundaries around your time? Inevitably. But you may also find that people start to respect you ­—and your time ­— a lot more. Most of us wish we could control our schedules better. If you’re willing to step up and argue for smarter policies (like requiring all meetings to have agendas), that benefits everyone. The key is to frame your advocacy not as purely self-interested (“I don’t have time for this nonsense”), but instead as a manifestation of your commitment to the company and your shared mission. “I want to make sure we’re all as productive as possible,” you could say, “and that’s why I think it’s important to make sure we’re respecting each other’s time.” In the end, that’s a hard message to resist.

　　因此，她開始采取一種新的策略：“所有想要給我打電話或是與我交談的人，必須填寫一份申請表”，說明將要討論的具體問題。“現(xiàn)在我已經(jīng)設(shè)下了界限，以及對于與我一起工作的人的期望，因此我更加容易辨別那些浪費我時間的人。”相同的，當(dāng)人們想要與我進行信息調(diào)查面談的時候，我開始給他們發(fā)送一份文件，文件里包含了那些關(guān)于他們感興趣的領(lǐng)域，我所寫的文章的鏈接(比如說成為一名咨詢顧問或是發(fā)言人，重塑職業(yè)生涯等等。)，并且請他們在看完這些文章之后再聯(lián)系我，看看他們還有什么問題。大多數(shù)人都再也沒有找過我，當(dāng)然這也無妨，畢竟我只想和那些真正感興趣并且投入其中的人交談。

　　你會因為強硬起來，給自己的時間設(shè)定清楚的界限而不得不面對非議嗎?這當(dāng)然不可避免。但你也會發(fā)現(xiàn)，別人開始更加尊重你和你的時間。我們中的大多數(shù)人都希望我們能夠更好地控制自己的日程。如果你愿意采取措施、尋求更明智的策略(比如說要求所有會議都設(shè)置議程)，就能夠造福每個人。關(guān)鍵所在，是不要將你的主張局限于利己方面(“我根本沒時間處理這種沒意義的事兒”)，而要將其擴展為對于公司和共同任務(wù)的投入。“我想要確保我們所有人都發(fā)揮了最大的效率，”你可以這樣說，“這就是為什么我覺得確信我們尊重彼此的時間非常重要。”最終，這就能成為別人難以抗拒的有力信息了。