内容来源：https://lifehacker.com/work/turn-your-to-do-list-into-data-to-maximize-productivity?utm_medium=RSS

内容总结：

【效率提升新思路：量化分析法为待办清单排序】

在时间管理领域，“艾森豪威尔矩阵”与“帕累托法则”常被用于任务优先级划分，但抽象判断标准让许多人感到困扰。近日，一种结合数据思维的量化排序方法引发关注，通过将任务转化为具体数值，帮助人们更科学地规划时间。

为何需要量化排序？
研究表明，仅20%的核心工作往往贡献80%的成果（帕累托法则），而过度堆积任务反而会降低效率（伊里奇定律）。专家建议采用“1-3-5清单法”，即每日聚焦1项重点任务、3项中等任务及5项琐事，以保持高效产出。

如何实现任务数据化？
战略顾问丹尼尔·肖提出“努力值-成效值”评分法：

1. 列出所有待办事项；
2. 为每项任务标注两个1-10的评分（努力值/所需精力，成效值/预期效果）；
3. 用“成效值÷努力值”计算优先级系数，按得分从高到低排序执行。
   例如：回复邮件（努力3/成效7）得分为2.33，而撰写会议报告（努力6/成效2）仅得0.33，前者应优先处理。该方法旨在快速锁定“低投入高回报”任务，契合帕累托法则的核心逻辑。

注意事项：动态调整与人性化补充

• 时间因素关键：低分任务可能因截止临近转为紧急，需定期更新评分；
• 避免机械执行：如备考周期较长时，需为碎片任务留出弹性空间；
• 休息同样重要：将休息纳入清单并赋予高成效值，符合耶基斯-多德森定律——适度压力提升效率，但过度追求速度可能导致倦怠。

这一方法通过数据驱动决策，为传统时间管理工具注入新思路，同时提醒使用者：高效离不开对“人”的要素的关注。

中文翻译：

你肯定知道给待办事项排序很重要，或许也尝试过各种方法，比如艾森豪威尔矩阵（用以判断事项的轻重缓急），或是帕累托法则（用以决定时间分配，争取最高效率）。问题在于，如何判定优先级有时很抽象。有些人更擅长处理具体数据——其实，确实存在一种更量化的任务排序方法。

为何需要给任务排序？
上文提到的帕累托法则指出，80%的成果往往来自20%的关键工作，因此必须精准筛选重点任务。加之每日精力有限，最有效的待办清单应当足够精简——例如采用"1-3-5清单"模式：1项核心任务、3项中型任务、5项小型任务。过度堆砌任务反而会拖累效率（这就是伊里奇定律的精髓）。

为避免精力分散或误入歧途，你需要制定策略；而要形成策略，就必须提前规划。艾森豪威尔矩阵虽能辅助识别紧急任务，但本质是主观判断工具。若能为任务标注数值，决策过程就会更数据化。

如何将待办清单转化为数据
战略顾问丹尼尔·科尔顿·肖在博客中提出了一套量化方法，通过数字排序使任务执行与帕累托法则相契合。

首先，像制定"1-3-5清单"初期那样，罗列近期所有待办事项。接着为每项任务标注两个1-10分的数值：前者代表所需精力，后者代表预期成效。例如：

• 回复邮件可能耗费3分精力，带来7分成效；
• 整理会议报告或许需6分精力，仅获2分成效；
• 药店取药耗费2分精力（视距离而定），取得4分甚至10分成效（取决于药品重要性）。

虽然评分仍带主观性，但仅通过"精力-成效"的维度思考，就能提升对任务的认知深度。关键步骤在于：用每项的"成效分"除以"精力分"。如回复邮件的成效分7÷精力分3≈2.33。待所有任务获得评分后，按升序排列并依序处理（突发紧急情况除外）。这样就能优先解决那些低精力高回报的任务——它们正属于创造80%成果的20%关键工作。

注意事项
某项精力分6/成效分2的任务可能排名靠后，但随时间推移其紧迫性会增加。规划时需兼顾时效性——比如四周后的考试显然精力投入与成果价值都很高，但既然有整月准备期，其他更紧迫的任务理应优先。房间整理在轻微凌乱时属于高精力低回报，但长期拖延会导致处理成本增加、清理收益上升，反而挤占其他任务时间。因此数据虽重要，仍需考量人性化因素。

最后别忘了休息。当所有事项被结构化排列后，人容易陷入焦躁冒进的状态。适度的紧迫感确实能提升效率（符合耶基斯-多德森定律），但过度负荷会导致倦怠。建议在初始清单中加入休息项，并赋予高成效值——因为休息本身就能提升效能。忽略这一点可能适得其反，让整个排序工作失去意义。

英文来源：

You know it's important to prioritize your to-do list, and may have tried various methods to do so, from the Eisenhower Matrix (to determine how timely and urgent each task is), to the Pareto principle (to decide how to allocate your time to maximize your results). The problem is that determining what's actually a priority can be an abstract problem. Some people work best when dealing with cold, hard numbers—and there's a way to take a more quantitative approach to prioritizing your to-dos.
Why prioritize your to-do list?
The Pareto principle, mentioned above, suggests that 80% of your results will come from 20% of your work, so you have to be picky about what you focus on. Plus, there’s only so much you can do in a day, so the best to-do list for you may be a narrow one—say, with room for one major activity, three medium-sized ones, and five little ones (known as a 1-3-5 list). If you try to do too much, your productivity can take a hit. (That’s Illich’s Law, baby.)
To avoid doing too much or working on the wrong things, you need a strategy, and to form a strategy, you need to do some planning. The Eisenhower matrix can be useful as you figure out which tasks have looming deadlines, but it’s a subjective tool. Assigning numbers to your tasks can make it all feel more data-driven.
How to turn your to-do list into data
I encountered this tip in a blog post from consultant and strategist Daniel Coulton Shaw, who breaks down how to number your tasks so they align with the Pareto principle.
First, write down everything you need to get done in the foreseeable future, as you would in the early stages of making a 1-3-5 list. Next, assign each task two numbers, both of which will be between 1 and 10. The first number is for the effort required, and the second is for the project's impact.
For example, answering all your emails may get a 3 for effort, but could yield results in the 7 territory. Finishing a report on a meeting could be a 6 in effort, but a 2 in results. Picking up meds at the pharmacy could be a 2 in effort, or a 7, depending how hard it is to get there, but a 4 in results, or even a 10, depending on how important the prescription is.
This part is subjective too, to a degree, but even thinking about your tasks in terms of “effort” and “results” will help you grasp their seriousness—and we’re not done yet. Next, divide each task's “results” number by its “effort” number. So, if answering emails is a 7 on the results scale and a 3 in effort, you’re looking at a 2.33 overall score. Once all your tasks have been assigned a score, you can rank them in ascending order and aim to tackle them in that order, unless something extra timely comes along. By doing this, you’ll knock out the tasks that are important but low effort—which should be that 20% of work that comprises 80% of your results.
What to keep in mind
Something that is a 6 in effort and 2 in results might not make it high up on your list, but could become more urgent as time goes on. Don't forget to think about timeliness when you're plotting. If you have a test in four weeks, obviously the effort and results are going to be high and you're going to want to study, but give yourself the wiggle room of remembering you do have a whole month, so other less pressing tasks might need to come first. Cleaning your room might be high effort and low results when it's just a little disorganized, but letting it go for too long will make it more effort and force it to yield more results, which will waste time when you should be doing other things no the list. So, yes, the data is important, but there are other human elements you should take into account.
Finally, don't forget breaks. When you see everything in such a structured, urgent-looking way, it might cause you to jump right in in a flurry. That's great and will help you better align with the Yerkes-Dodson law, which dictates you need a bit of stress to be most productive, but it can lead to burnout. Write breaks down on that initial list and assign them a high value in terms of results—because taking breaks will yield results. Failing to do so can set you back, rendering the whole exercise useless.