A Drucker Synthesis

How We Know This Works

This page connects three things:

1. Peter Drucker's method from his 1999 article "Managing Oneself"
2. Ultraworking's monthly planning system (2018) that I used personally
3. How I applied it at a paper mill (2023)

What surprised me: the structure didn't change across all three contexts.

---

The Core Idea (From Drucker)

In 1999, Peter Drucker wrote that knowledge workers need to manage themselves like CEOs manage companies.

His method was simple:

"Whenever you make a key decision or take a key action, write down what you expect will happen. Nine or 12 months later, compare the actual results with your expectations."

He called this feedback analysis.

It's not new. The Jesuits and Calvinists used it in the 1500s. It's how they grew so fast while other groups didn't.

The power is in the comparison: what you thought would happen vs. what actually happened. That gap tells you where you're strong and where you're not.

---

How I Applied It at a Paper Mill (The Proof)

I used Ultraworking's monthly planning system to capture my work at a paper mill under operational pressure.

The daily logs, Strategy A3 reviews, and prioritization matrices were how I applied those principles in an industrial environment.

Daily Capture

Every day, I captured:

• What happened (just the facts)
• What decision was made
• What question it raised

Example (Feb 15, 2023):

What happened: "Decision point: Went with ten updating current SOP's for Paper Machine."

What it raised: "What are the unarticulated fears and beliefs of the Paper machine key leaders?"

This wasn't a journal. It was capturing the decision at the moment, before the outcome could distort the memory.

Monthly Review

At the end of each month, I reviewed what I actually did (not what was planned) to identify patterns and plan for the next month.

This is my version of Drucker's feedback analysis: comparing what I thought would happen vs. what actually happened.

The Strategy A3 Tool

I used a multi-sheet tool to keep the team aligned:

• Mission at the top: "Stabilize Paper Mill Fundamental Operations"
• Key initiatives with owners and tactics
• Weekly reviews to check: Are we still aligned? What changed?

This made sure we weren't just reacting. We had a plan, but we adjusted it based on what we were actually seeing.

The 80% Rule

We never planned more than 80% of our time.

That 20% buffer was critical. When something unexpected happened (and it always did), we had room to respond without everything falling apart.

---

The Ultraworking System I Used

Ultraworking's monthly planning system has a four-phase structure:

1. Debrief: "Factually, what happened last month?"
2. Evaluate: "How is life going?"
3. Prioritize: "What matters most?" (with a 100% attention limit)
4. Operationalize: "What will I actually do?"

The key constraint: You only have 100% of your attention.

The spreadsheet color-codes this:

• Purple (≤100%): You're good
• Yellow (101-129%): Warning
• Red (≥130%): You're lying to yourself

This forces real choices. You can't do everything, so you have to pick.

---

The Pattern (What All Three Share)

In all three cases, I kept doing the same four things:

1. Capture what you do (at the moment, not after)
2. Review what actually happened (not what was planned)
3. Learn from the patterns
4. Adjust and repeat

---

Why This Matters

Most tools try to help after things go wrong.

This helps before stories harden and blame sets in.

It keeps decisions close to the people making them. It keeps learning tied to real work. It keeps momentum without pretending everything is under control.

---

What the Software Does

I kept wishing this was easier to do consistently.

Doing it by hand worked — but it didn't scale well.

The software we're building doesn't invent a new method. It makes the proven method easier to keep doing.

It:

• makes capturing faster (seven taps instead of a spreadsheet)
• keeps context from getting lost
• makes patterns easier to see over time

It does not:

• tell you what to think
• replace your judgment
• automate leadership

If the discipline isn't there, the software won't help.

---

The Line of Succession

1. Drucker (1999): Gave us the method (feedback analysis)
2. Ultraworking (2018): Created a monthly planning system based on those principles
3. Paper Mill Application (2023): I used it to capture work in a high-pressure industrial environment
4. Now: I'm building software to make the same discipline easier for others

This isn't about technology. It's about a discipline that works.

---

One Sentence Summary

I used this method personally, proved it worked in a paper mill, and now I'm building software to make it accessible to others.

---

TL;DR

I used Drucker's feedback analysis method personally through Ultraworking's monthly planning system, then proved it worked at a paper mill under real operational pressure. The same structure held up at both individual and organizational scale. Now I'm building software to make it easier for others to use the same discipline.

Next steps: Try the method yourself, then let me know what you find.

---

Try It Yourself

Ready to start? Here's the Ultraworking monthly planning spreadsheet:

Ultraworking Monthly Planning Spreadsheet

Make a copy, fill it out, and see what patterns show up. All you need is an email address.

If it helps you, tell a friend.

Have feedback or questions? Visit the Feedback [blocked] page or email [email protected].

---

References

[1] Drucker, P. F. (1999). Managing Oneself. Harvard Business Review. [2] the paper mill Machine Learning .03 Download.pdf [3] the paper mill Learning and Development Strategy FY23 Workup_4.10.23.pdf [4] Initial Training Analysis 2.6.23.pdf [5] Ultraworking. (2018). Monthly Planning. GitBook. Retrieved from https://ultraworking.gitbooks.io/monthly-planning/content/