Over the years, I’ve always been looking for ways to be able to get more done in a day. I’m sure most people can relate. You always hear: everyone has the same 24 hours in a day. Therefore we are limited to those 24 hours each day (and about a third of that time is needed for sleep)… or are we?
Here’s my dilemma: I’m not (by choice) an early bird. That’s not to say that I don’t like to get up early – because I do – I just don’t like to go to sleep! But, eventually, I have to give in and that makes getting up more difficult if I’ve only slept for a few hours versus the more ideal 7 or 8 hours…
But I think I found the solution!
Why not look at our time based on a 7 day or 168 hour week?
Forget the 24 hour cycle, lets look at the 168 hour cycle. Then we’re no longer bound by that 24 hour rule. You see, I think I have discovered how you can get more out of a day without sacrificing sleep!
How you ask?
Well, just the other day I found myself NOT sleeping through the night, just worked through the night on my computer until 7am came around and I needed to take the car in to the dealer to have it serviced for our 5,000 mile trek across the country this saturday. I didn’t have to wake up, because I was already awake, just went and took my shower, got ready, grabbed my breakfast shake and headed out the door. And I felt great! Got to the dealer, made several important calls, replied to some emails, took care of business and still had plenty of energy.
Then about 11 or 12 – definitely by 1pm – I was feeling it. I was tired and I needed to sleep SOON! Still had a few other things to wrap up – a more-complicated-than-it-needed-to-be loan closing and a trip to the court house and by around 4pm I conked out for good (and I did sleep GOOD, let me tell you).
So it may not be the most convenient schedule to keep – having to sleep at weird times of the day and all (not a big deal, right? 😉 ) – but if you’re more concerned with getting more in and not at what hour that’s happens (within reason – you’ll be awake for certain parts of every business day), I may have the solution for you!
Now, as a side note, Katie has already threatened to kick me out of the house if I were to make this a regular part of my schedule, so it’s not going to work for me, BUT I think it still has potential (for someone out there, surely!).
Ok, so here’s how my productivity plan works:
In essence, this brilliant plan of mine will still allow you to get 8 hours of sleep per day/night while adding 8 MORE HOURS A WEEK to your schedule (or 15 hours if you’re only planning on sleeping 7 hours a night, though it makes the math a little funny…).
The secret is you just stay up longer. Rather than being awake for 16 hours and sleeping 8, you stay awake for four hours longer each day and THEN you sleep 8 hours. So it works on a 28 hour cycle versus 24.
Clever, right? I can always stay up longer & now I would be able to stay up longer and still get in 8 hours of sleep! What could be better?
At the end of one week, you save 8 hours because you’ve only had to sleep 6 times!
The one minor inconvenience though is that every day you wake up 4 hours later than the day before. (So if you wake up on Monday at 6am, Tuesday you’d have to wake up at 10am, and by Thursday you’d be getting up at 6pm after going to sleep at 10am) So one minor inconvenience but hey, you will have just increased your available awake time by over 6% and still being able to sleep 8 hours each night (or cycle may be more accurate).
Hope that helps in some way shape or form.
…And if you do try it out, let me know how it works! 🙂 I think – for the right person – it would be amazing! Let me know your thoughts on this – is this the greatest idea since sliced bread?? Maybe you can help me come up with a name for this time-creating sleep strategy?
I’ll try to come up with some more of these practical, everyday-type solutions during our long road trip to California. If I think of anything, you’ll be the first to know!
PS> If you’d prefer to just get paid while you sleep, check this out: 3 Things Anyone Can Do
Please Comment Below: