There is one more major technique of time creation which we need to use in order to complete our repertoire. Reasonably regularly, about every six months, we need to stand back and review what we have done and assess what we have achieved. We need to carry out a critical analysis of performance up to that point.

For such a review, we need a systematic approach that is easy to learn and easy to begin practising. It is necessary so that we can be confident that we have indeed made progress and can see what we need to do next. If we have not made progress, we need to know why and to try to identify ways of remedying the situation.

The approach offered here consists of the following:

• What has been done is considered from three main standpoints: Content, Intentions and Treatment. On the basis of the responses to these, an Evaluation of events is arrived at. This gives us a convenient mnemonic: CITE.
• The Content, in this context, is what has actually been done within the set time period. It represents an attempt to state explicitly what it is precisely that has been done. Thus, this stage is purely factual and contains no opinions.
• The Intentions are the reasons why the actions have been taken in the first place. An attempt needs to be made to ascertain whether the aims were reasonable and achievable, and whether or not they fitted well into the overall approach to better time creation. If the intentions were too ambitious or flawed for some other reason, this is the time to be honest with oneself and admit to having tried to do too much.
• The Treatment calls for a concern with how the events being studied took place. An assessment is required of the techniques used, the method of selecting the objectives for achievement and the actual way in which things were tackled.
• The Evaluation is based on the three above factors and involves reaching conclusions and judgments about the facts that can be supported by evidence and defended in argument. It also requires suggesting how, where and why failures occurred and how deficiencies can be remedied. It should emphasise, however, the achievements made, since to focus too heavily on failure may well deter an individual from continuing to use the method.

The following checklist may be helpful in carrying out the process:

• 1.Content: What, precisely, are the facts about what has been done so far to achieve better time creation? Are they accurate, as far as I can tell? Are they plausible? How reliable are the facts?
• 2.Intentions: What were you trying to achieve? Were your objectives reasonable or were you trying to do too much within the time period?
• 3.Treatment: Was this a rational approach? Have you tried to make things look better than they were in any way? Have you underestimated your achievements in any way? Could you have done anything differently and been more effective?

• 4.Evaluation: If you failed to achieve your objectives, how, why and in which parts or ways did you fail? In which parts did you do particularly well? What is your final overall judgment, bearing in mind your responses to all the foregoing points?

You would not necessarily ask all these questions every time. There are times when other questions would be more appropriate. These are really only intended to get you thinking critically about what you do.

An alternative approach you may prefer is the one we encountered in Part 1 Chapter 11 as a flexible performance strategy. This would, in this context, work as follows:

Key:

Whichever method you choose, you should now have acquired all the necessary skills to complete the transformation from headless chicken to laidback bear.