Become More Productive Just By Following 7 Points

I’ve started using Medium, as a source of inspiration and some guidance, a bit later than everyone else. But anyway I found these 7 things everyone should stop doing to become more productive.

1. Stop working overtime and increase your productivity
The more you work, the less effective and productive you are going to become over both short and long term. In other words: sleep more, take naps, do whatever you like sometimes, because working all the time will eventually lead to nowhere.

2. Don’t say “yes” too often
According to the Pareto Principle, 20% of the effort produces 80% of the results; however, 20% of the results consumes 80% of the effort. Instead of working harder, we should focus primarily on those efforts that produce 80% of the results and forgo the rest. We should stop saying “yes” to tasks that bring low or almost no result. The Pareto Principal does work, everyone just needs to learn how to use it.


3. Stop doing everything yourself and start letting people help you
Delegation is a thing, especially if you are running a company or in a leadership position. It is important to divide work between different people and trust them. Otherwise you will just burn out.

4. Stop being a perfectionist
Here are some problems associated with being a perfectionist:

They spend more time than required on a task.
They procrastinate and wait for the perfect moment. In business, if it is the perfect moment, you are too late.
They miss the big picture while being too focused on small things.
Marketers often wait for the perfect moment. In doing so, they end up missing it.

The perfect moment is NOW.


5. Stop doing repetitive tasks and start automating it.
Use CRM software or another, but if the task can be automated then there is no point of doing it all the time.

6. Stop guessing and start backing up your decisions with data
If you can optimize websites for search engines, you can optimize your lives to grow and reach your maximum potential.

7. Stop working, and have do-nothing time
Most people don’t realize that we’re essentially locking ourselves in a box when we are too focused on something. It’s important to walk away from our work once in a while and have some alone time.

Details here 7 Things You Need To Stop Doing To Be More Productive, Backed By Science




It is difficult to know for sure how much is too much of posting personal content online. We want to promote ourselves and don’t want to seem like we are bragging or worse crying for attention.

Bloggers, no matter fashion, tech or food, should find this balance somehow. Success of their blogs depends on this balance. Too much bragging would draw potential visitors away, no promotion at all definitely would not bring any new people to the website.

BUT there is hope for everyone.


Most of these strategies look at the mix of sharing your content, others, and some personal updates.

Introduced by TA McCann from, the 5-3-2 rule of social media states that
5 posts should be content from others
3 posts should be content from you
2 posts should be personal status updates

Note that the 5-3-2 is not a daily quota but rather a ratio for any group of 10 updates you post over any timeframe (same goes for the rest of these ratios, too).



Similar to 5-3-2 is 4-1-1
Much like the 5-3-2 rule, the 4-1-1 Rule seeks a good ratio of content from others, content from you, and reshares. Popularized by Andrew Davis of Tippingpoint Labs and Joe Pulizzi of Content Marketing Institute, the 4-1-1 looks like this in practice:

Four pieces of relevant, original content from others
One retweet for every One self-serving update

Shai Coggins of Vervely has a somewhat unique approach to a balanced sharing schedule. The 555+ Guideline seeks to add some variety to a timeline and to keep your social media profile from “looking like a pulpit.”

Five updates about you and your content
Five updates about others
Five responses/replies
+ miscellaneous posts that add value like #FollowFriday or user-generated content


Rule of Thirds
Mentioned on the Hootsuite blog by Sam Milbrath, the Rule of Thirds is a perfectly balanced way to split up your social media posts. It works like this:

1/3 of your updates are about you and your content
1/3 of your updates are for sharing content from others and surfacing ideas
1/3 of your updates are based on personal interactions that build your brand

Golden Ratio – 30/60/10
The Golden Ratio from Rallyverse covers similar ground as the 5-3-2 rule, albeit with a couple small tweaks:

30% owned
60% curated
10% promotional

The 20-to-1 rule

This ratio by Michael Hyatt states that you have to make 20 relational deposits for every marketing withdrawal.


Strategies do not necessarily  guarantee success in social media promotion, but all these rules have 1 point in common is that for every promotion you post online you have to post at least a double of non-promoted posts.

FastCompany has a great case of how Buffer does SM promotion, and Buffer’s main strategy is 90%  own content and 10% from others.

More here 



Fashion Bloggers Earnings Are Getting Up To $1 Million A Year

Apparently, I got to this point in life where I found out that fashion bloggers are earning now up to $1 million a year. Style bloggers can simply take pictures of what they are wearing and receive income which is equivalent to top management of big companies.

Eager to drive sales, luxury brands and retailers are offering outsize appearance fees to Internet-famous trendsetters. Fees have gone up from a minimum of $5,000 five years ago to $10,000 to $15,000 today, WWD reports. On top of that, bloggers earn money from affiliate sales (essentially, commissions from retailers for online customer referrals); brand collaborations (which usually involve teaming up with designers on capsule collections); launching their own clothing collections; and ad revenue from their sites. All that can add up to seven-figure annual incomes, WWD says. Bloggers are becoming brands in themselves, turning their musings on fashion–often born as personal hobbies–into businesses.


Some  examples of top bloggers are below  (most of whom declined to discuss specific figures, but are estimated to be earning upward of $1 million a year)

– Chiara Ferragni of  The Blonde Salad,
– Nashville-based Mary Seng of Happily Grey,Chrissy Ott of The Perfect Palette
–  Erin Gates of Elements of Style.Bag Snob, a blog started in 2005 by Tina Craig and Kelly Cook, spawned a handbag line, Snob Essentials, which helped tip their business into seven-figure territory.




– 25-year-old Leandra Medine has made her name with the hilarious, self-deprecating  Man Repeller, which landed her a book deal. – Salt Lake City-based Rachel Parcell, 23, of Pink Peonies, who started her blog two years ago as a personal online journal.  Now, she’s making at least $960,000 from affiliate programs alone in a year–with added income from partnerships with the likes of TRESemmé and J.Crew.



Bloggers are also all over social media. Instagram is their main tool in promoting themselves and increasing incomes.

Anyways, the main point  I can take away from here is that if you life clothes, shoes and getting photographed then you can make money out of it without working 9-5.

So I might reconsider my career options.


How Top Style Bloggers Are Earning $1 Million A Year



Subconsciousness and 8 Mistakes Our Brains Make

Subconsciousness is not completely understandable and a bit weird. FastCompany prepared a list here of 8 mistakes we all make without completely realising them.

I know I make them.


We listen to who we want to listen, we hear what want to hear, and we like people who are like us and like what we like. While this makes sense, it means that we subconsciously begin to ignore anything that threatens our world views, since we surround ourselves with people and information that confirm what we already think.

This is called confirmation bias. If you’ve ever heard of the frequency illusion, this is very similar. The frequency illusion occurs when you buy a new car, and suddenly you see the same car everywhere. Or when a pregnant woman suddenly notices other pregnant women all over the place. It’s a passive experience, where our brains seek out information that’s related to us, but we believe there’s been an actual increase in the frequency of those occurrences.

Confirmation bias is a more active form of the same experience. It happens when we proactively seek out information that confirms our existing beliefs.


The “swimmer’s body illusion” occurs when we confuse selection factors with results. Another good example is top-performing universities: Are they actually the best schools, or do they choose the best students, who do well regardless of the school’s influence? Our mind often plays tricks on us, and that is one of the key ones to be aware of.

What really jumped out at me when researching this section was this particular line from Dobelli’s book:

Without this illusion, half of advertising campaigns would not work.
It makes perfect sense, when you think about it. If we believed that we were predisposed to be good at certain things (or not), we wouldn’t buy into ad campaigns that promised to improve our skills in areas where it’s unlikely we’ll ever excel.


It’s all about the  the sunk-cost fallacy, we all do it, no shame in here, just the brain.

The term sunk cost refers to any cost (not just monetary, but also time and effort) that has been paid already and cannot be recovered. So it’s a payment of time or money that’s gone forever, basically.

The reason we can’t ignore the cost, even though it’s already been paid, is that we wired to feel loss far more strongly than gain.

Hal Arkes and Catehrine Blumer created an experiment in 1985 that demonstrated your tendency to go fuzzy when sunk costs come along. They asked subjects to assume they had spent $100 on a ticket for a ski trip in Michigan, but soon after found a better ski trip in Wisconsin for $50 and bought a ticket for this trip, too. They then asked the people in the study to imagine they learned the two trips overlapped and the tickets couldn’t be refunded or resold. Which one do you think they chose, the $100 good vacation, or the $50 great one?

More than half of the people in the study went with the more expensive trip. It may not have promised to be as fun, but the loss seemed greater.
So like the other mistakes , the sunk-cost fallacy leads us to miss or ignore the logical facts presented to us and instead make irrational decisions based on our emotions–without even realizing we’re doing so.


This one is my favourite. When you flip a coin and guess Heads or Tails you have 50/50 chance of being right. Every time, this happens every time. It does not matter if you guessed right 4 times in a row, the chances are still 50/50 each time. The odds don’t change.

The gambler’s fallacy is a glitch in our thinking–once again, we’re proven to be illogical creatures. The problem occurs when we place too much weight on past events and confuse our memory with how the world actually works, believing that they will have an effect on future outcomes (or, in the case of Heads or Tails, any weight, since past events make absolutely no difference to the odds).


Every time people buy something they don’t really need, people try to rationalise the purchase. We’re pretty good at convincing ourselves that those flashy, useless, badly thought-out purchases are necessary after all. This is known as post-purchase rationalization or Buyer’s Stockholm Syndrome.

Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort we get when we’re trying to hold onto two competing ideas or theories. For instance, if we think of ourselves as being nice to strangers, but then we see someone fall over and don’t stop to help them, we would then have conflicting views about ourselves: We are nice to strangers, but we weren’t nice to the stranger who fell over. This creates so much discomfort that we have to change our thinking to match our actions–in other words, we start thinking of ourselves as someone who is not nice to strangers, since that’s what our actions proved.

So in the case of our impulse shopping trip, we would need to rationalize the purchases until we truly believe we needed to buy those things so that our thoughts about ourselves line up with our actions (making the purchases).


Here is long but great examplanation of this mistake we all make.

Dan Ariely is a behavioral economist who gave a TED talks about the irrationality of the human brain when it comes to making decisions.

He illustrates this particular mistake in our thinking superbly, with multiple examples. The anchoring effect essentially works like this: rather than making a decision based on pure value for investment (time, money, and the like), we factor in comparative value–that is, how much value an option offers when compared to another option.

One example is an experiment that Dan conducted using two kinds of chocolates for sale in a booth: Hershey’s Kisses and Lindt Truffles. The Kisses were one penny each, while the Truffles were 15 cents each. Considering the quality differences between the two kinds of chocolates and the normal prices of both items, the Truffles were a great deal, and the majority of visitors to the booth chose the Truffles.

For the next stage of his experiment, Dan offered the same two choices, but lowered the prices by one cent each. So now the Kisses were free, and the Truffles cost 14 cents each. Of course, the Truffles were even more of a bargain now, but since the Kisses were free, most people chose those, instead.

Your loss-aversion system is always vigilant, waiting on standby to keep you from giving up more than you can afford to spare, so you calculate the balance between cost and reward whenever possible. -You Are Not So Smart
Another example Dan offers in his TED talk is when consumers are given holiday options to choose between. When given a choice of a trip to Rome, all expenses paid, or a similar trip to Paris, the decision is quite hard. Each city comes with its own food, culture, and travel experiences that the consumer must choose between.

When a third option is added, however, such as the same Rome trip, but without coffee included in the morning, things change. When the consumer sees that they have to pay 2,50 euros for coffee in the third trip option, not only does the original Rome trip suddenly seem superior out of these two, it also seems superior to the Paris trip. Even though they probably hadn’t even considered whether coffee was included or not before the third option was added.


Our memories are highly fallible and plastic. And yet, we tend to subconsciously favor them over objective facts. Here is an example:

Suppose you read a page of text and then you’re asked whether the page includes more words that end in “ing” or more words with “n” as the second-last letter. Obviously, it would be impossible for there to be more “ing” words than words with “n” as their penultimate letter (it took me a while to get that–read over the sentence again, carefully, if you’re not sure why that is). However, words ending in “ing” are easier to recall than words like hand, end, or and, which have “n” as their second-last letter, so we would naturally answer that there are more “ing” words.

What’s happening here is that we are basing our answer of probability (that is, whether it’s probable that there are more “ing” words on the page) on how available relevant examples are (for instance, how easily we can recall them). Our troubles in recalling words with “n” as the second last letter make us think those words don’t occur very often, and we subconsciously ignore the obvious facts in front of us.


The funny thing about lots of these thinking mistakes, especially those related to memory, is that they’re so ingrained.

It’s another one that explains how easily we ignore actual facts:

The human mind is so wedded to stereotypes and so distracted by vivid descriptions that it will seize upon them, even when they defy logic, rather than upon truly relevant facts.


Coming back soon…

I disappeared for couple of months because of my new job.
But I will come back very soon to describe everything about my social job searching campaign and post new things from the world of social media advertising and tech.

But the main outcome from my campaign is that I managed to find a job again as last year.

I managed to get a place at Mediacom in paid social and started working there in August and so far everything is going great.


The Sapling Wallet With Custom Signatures

Today I want to present The Wallet for Minimalists with a touch of class. Another project on Kickstarter.
It’s new and wooden. The wallet also benefits from custom name engraving.

Your have couple of choices here between Walnut, Cherry, and Birch wood.


The wallet is a two piece design with tabs much like you see on folders.
The two wood laminate fibreboard plates are held together by a durable elastic band that allow the wallet to expand.
The Sapling Wallet can carry 1-8 cards comfortably but can carry more if you need to.You won’t need to worry about cards falling out.The elastic holds the cards securely no matter how many cards you have in the wallet at one time.Also you can hold cash under the elastic band on the outside of the wallet.Think of the elastic band as a money clip.

The best part is the wallet is hand-made manufactured, apart from the signature, which is done my laser. Besides, the Sapling wallet is constructed from a laminate wood, similar to what you find in some wood flooring, so it is super durable.

The project has already reached a goal of $1500, but it certainly would benefit form additional funding.

So check it out.